TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

nwz123 Archive

View 0 posts and 1,227 comments by nwz123 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,227 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
4

Fake news.
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 02:48 PM
48

lol, don't hold your breath.
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 02:48 PM
89

random dig at black people. I can tell this guy's the brains of the operation.
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 02:48 PM
86

Heterosexuals spread aids too. Please, get fucked with a rusty nail. Repeatedly.
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 02:47 PM
155

Obsessive preoccupation with other people's sex lives: a conservative hobby.
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 02:47 PM
278

Im sorry, is this a thread, or a fucking safe space for sociopaths? Fuck you. edit: lol, you morons think telling someone to watch gay porn is an insult...Only idiots think this. To everyone else, that's normal. As in, whatever your fucking orientation is, it's NORMAL to be oriented that way. Jesus fuck you guys are slow.
/r/PussyPass22/02/17 02:46 PM
0

Time and time again, it's proven that no one is immune to the effects of dogma and personal bias, or free from contributing to our general culture of oppression and suffering.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 10:24 PM
1

While it is very likely the case that her experience with domestic abuse at the hands of a male has impacted her ability to empathize with the male gender, that in no-way excuses the deliberate attempt to downplay the suffering of anyone. If she truly cared about domestic violence, then even if she doubted the frequency of female-on-male IPV, she wouldn't dismiss the effects/impact of it and the seriousness of it as a whole.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 10:22 PM
1

People aren't born violent murderers....they're taught it. Same with hate.
/r/MensRights28/05/14 10:16 PM
0

The whole point of pointing out a distinction is not to erase the other side but to show how one side experiences the same phenomenon in a particularized way. I don't have a problem with conversations being focused solely on one side so long as there's generally space in the public discussion for all sides. Also, I disagree with OP: his his prejudice was his mental instability. They go hand in hand. Bigotry itself, I think, is a form of delusion and a detachment from reality. It's also a thoroug…
/r/MensRights28/05/14 10:02 PM
1

I understand what you were trying to do here, but I don't think doing it during the aftermath of a tragedy is the best example of 'good timing.'
/r/MensRights28/05/14 09:43 PM
1

Sounds to me that you're basically saying that people don't understand themselves or the world around them. I agree. :P If someone understood themselves properly, why would they have need to be assholes to others in other to feel good about themselves?
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:59 PM
1

I kind of want to abolish this paradigm of being 'useless'. Not a single thing in this universe is without use or 'value' and it's our ignorance/inaction that fails to realize this. Furthermore, I argue that it's because people aren't aware of the implications of realizing this true value and what that means for their lives, that they continue to make the wrong choices. 'a woman who doesn't do anything?' 'a man who doesn't do anything?' All paradigms oriented around having to give more than you …
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:56 PM
1

Yep, those are both very broken perspectives. Broken as they may be, they're also true to a degree, which is what's important. They're truthful perspectives taken to the extreme precisely because they don't know how to account for the other variables at work behind those phenomena. 'I don't know why they do it, so I'm going to just go ahead and assume that it's because they're bad and that things are their fault.' <---- This is a normal human line of reasoning, so every time I see it, I'm unders…
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:53 PM
1

Yep, those are both very broken perspectives. Broken as they may be, they're also true to a degree, which is what's important. They're truthful perspectives taken to the extreme precisely because they don't know how to account for the other variables at work behind those phenomena.
/r/MensRights25/02/14 01:50 PM
2

That's the exact opposite of what i'm saying, so....no. But please don't misunderstand. I was originally agreeing with your point, but you're definitely lacking perspective on this. The whole idea of being 'useful' is used by society as a shaming tactic rather than an enticement to help everyone develop themselves to their maximum capacity. The idea isn't to spread this to women 'equally', but rather to dispel it all together. The goal isn't to make everyone go through the same rigors men do [or…
/r/MensRights24/02/14 09:48 AM
1

Apathy is a pretty fucking scary state/place to be in existentially speaking, but if you're talking about freedom then i'm all for that.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:51 PM
-1

You, at the same time, said that girls aren't physically bullied to the same extent as guys, which leads to the implication that not many 'geek girls' [who are genuine geeks] would qualify. This is akin to the argument that if you, as a black person, hasn't experienced racism in the same way as, say, another black person who's been 'down and with the struggle since the jump', then your experiences don't matter. You don't need to suffer to be a geek; you need to suffer if you're a geek in an imma…
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:49 PM
1

It's funny: on the one hand, exchanges like this only show your point more and more. Yet your point isn't all-encompassing. perspectives are a matter of time: they both illuminate and darken.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:47 PM
1

Yes he was, and he's being obtuse about it.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:46 PM
0

I don't think we need to keep suffering as a tool of initiation anymore. Geeks suffered precisely because society was too immature to see the value they bring.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:45 PM
0

Everyone? Really?
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:45 PM
2

Oh FFS. You seriously think I don't know people who know their shit better than you do? Well, I guess not, since I can't possibly be a geek. Now you can see why they would claim that 'disagreement = abuse.' Yea, if you totally don't allow the other side to have respect/dignity, it can be, which is ironic since that's what they're doing atm. Emotions are wild things.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:44 PM
0

Insult. Not necessarily. It's a truism to say 'there's someone out there that knows more than you in area X'. You taking it as an insult is more insecurity than objective reality. But this is only one small example, so don't take my comments to heart. I'm just here for the sake of further elucidation/clarity.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:43 PM
0

I don't think that that's what she was saying.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:41 PM
1

a whole universe Well, it being a WHOLE UNIVERSE is a matter of perspective, lol, and yes it is fucking misogyny, but it's paranoia-fueled at its core. Those are safe-places for people like yourself: how well would you take it if you viewed someone as coming into that space with the purposes of manipulating/exploiting you? Not very kindly. That and the fact that it's a fucking global phenomenon [gender roles] only adds to the sense of urgency that these folks are feeling. Is it right? Hell no. I…
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:40 PM
1

Apparently you don't exist.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:35 PM
1

Obviously, you don't want a woman who sits around and can't support herself either, right? Like Kim Kardashian before Ray J? The dominant paradigm in society is that sex sells and that women are the gatekeepers of it, whether they want to have this role or not, and that they, like any other rational agent, use it to their advantage.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:34 PM
1

Because that's a fucking lie and you know it. Society likes to use the whole 'grown-up' tag to label things it [not-so] secretly wants you to do. Want to be an adult? Enter the workforce and being exploited, too! Want to be a man? Marry your SO, put that ring on her finger, support the fam, etc. Want to be a woman? Find a man, have kids, etc etc. Society wouldn't know what existential maturity was if it bit them on the ass [and trust me, it's done so several times - read: Socrates].
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:33 PM
1

In essence? Yes. In actuality? Nope. Not when women control 70% of consumer expenditures. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-07-24/women-controlling-consumer-spending-sparse-among-central-bankers.html I bet you also think all women love assholes. Not to be hyperbolic, but I actually have had a women tell me something like this [not the 'all part' but 'in-general]. Yes, I was equally perplexed and dazed by this [not that I think it's explicitly true but that it speaks to something deeper in te…
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:29 PM
0

Everything about this post is unworthy of the argument it attempts to get at. Your comment doesn't just do it a disservice to the overall point: it fucking eviscerates the truth that tries to make itself known by it. You're everything wrong with discourse today.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:27 PM
2

calling someone a 'dead-beat' for not being able to 'support themselves' in a capitalistic context where there must be, by definition, winners AND losers, is exactly that. Shaming.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:26 PM
1

Yes, in the same way that men 'take charge' as a part of their gender role, women 'let them' as part of theirs: they define 'a man taking care of himself' as being extended to his 'family', of which they are a part of. This is by design: it's called hypoagency.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:25 PM
2

Women not wanting you to be a deadbeat who can't support himself is a given. Stay at home parents? Yea, i'm calling bullshit on this point. Woman not wanting to be with someone who never does anything with his life (low 'status') is a given. Not really this, but more like 'women don't mess with those of lesser status then themselves, and generally aim for 'higher' status' but hey, doesn't that mean that men aren't allowed to be equals unless they're seen/judged as being 'less-than' because they …
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:19 PM
0

Because only men are abusers? Buh?
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:09 PM
1

No different than women thinking men only want sex with them or that sex is inherently objectifying rather than a process of emotional/physical unification with another fucking human being where they share a connection so deep it touches their very soul. Nope, guys just want sex because of boobs and that's all they want. Anyone this game, hun. The point to growth is to move beyond impossible rhetoric to truthful explanations and insightful understanding.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:09 PM
1

they're just not attracted to assholes who blame them for why they couldn't get laid in high school. Because the ONLY explanation for the phenomenon being examined here is this. Nope, it's not like women have ever taken advantage of a source that provides them with attention/positive feels. Nope, women aren't people, too. >.> The subject of this post is a phenomenon that actually exists while, at the same time, what you're saying is true too. It's not an either/or situation.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:06 PM
1

That's a lot of 'if's and not a lot of substance. People don't do things in vacuums and not ever situation can end with a princess needing to be rescued. Personally, I think those who are genuine nerds are somewhat united in this issue since casuals can fuck off.
/r/MensRights23/02/14 06:05 PM
0

When did I deny that? Oh wait, I didn't. Looks like someone's not reading. I simply asked you what you 'meant' since definitions are always in question. At this point, after several invitations to actually express your argument, I can tell that your purpose here isn't to make your case but to avoid discussion. Edit: since I can see that this still might be misunderstood, I'll recap for sake of clarity. I posted making the argument that the same 'aggression' present in those who commit misandry i…
/r/MensRights23/02/14 05:53 PM
0

Nah, but feel free to express your definitions of them and we'll talk. It's your argument. [hint: 'objective' is an illusion since we can never truly see the 'reality' of a thing outside of interpretations. Or put differently, no definition is truly 'objective.' hence why we have to go through the difficulty of disagreeing until we realize we're both saying the same thing]
/r/MensRights23/02/14 11:08 AM
0

And how exactly did I 'defend' a 'misandrist' and why should we waste time on your definition that's either too broad/nebulous to have any real meaning [as in i incidentally defended her on one point while applying the same criticism to you on the other, and thus showed no real deference, rendering your charge of latent misandry borderline stupid] or too narrow to be called an accurate representation of what I did [hint: it's not accurate at all]. Oh wait. I see what I did there.
/r/MensRights21/02/14 08:09 AM
0

Stole the words right from my mouth. If what i'm saying, which is undeniable, is so difficult for you to grasp then chances are it's because you're bargaining in bad faith. Bigotry is the object: misandry/misogyny are but particular forms of it. Period.
/r/MensRights19/02/14 10:44 AM
1

You cannot truly know either one without committing at least one of them, and you cannot commit one without committing the other, in essence. They are both two different expressions of the same thing: bigotry born from the inability to understand the necessary relation of pain in the 'growth' process. Men and women are in the process of finding new [and hopefully better] ways of interacting with one another. What's going on here is similar to what women are trying to do in the sense that we're a…
/r/MensRights18/02/14 02:27 PM
2

Misandry is to us what misogyny is to them.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 05:17 AM
1

But that sentiment is the exact same that you are sending out. She felt the same as you do now and that's what formed the expression.
/r/MensRights18/02/14 12:04 AM
1

Well, i've played MUDs, but i'll be damned if I know what a MOO is [if there's a significant difference, from what I read, I dunno]. And yea, the best response to people doing things like that [ie pretending to be a female to gain items/benefit] is to just treat them like they're normal. So basically do what you ought to do IRL. :P
/r/MensRights16/02/14 11:51 AM
1

You would damn a soul for not being perfect in every expression of itself? Please.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 02:23 PM
3

I just noticed and already started reading. :) And yea, that was the way you put it. I wholeheartedly agree.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 02:22 PM
2

I mean, assuming the society already views men like this, would you prefer a situation where (a) saying it openly is a taboo and makes you sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist, or (b) saying it openly is allowed? Neither. I think that such things ought not to exist in the first place. Expectations are not a matter of fairness but control. As for awareness of the matter, then yes it's good that this is out there...but really, how many people are having conversations about this rather than just …
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:39 PM
2

Can I subscribe to your newsletter? ^
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:37 PM
3

You're the dude I was talking about! You wrote some awesome analysis on how being a male-homosexual [or am I remembering this wrong?] made you worse than a social neuter... or something. Yea, really good stuff.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:36 PM
1

Then you smash your face against the keyboard one. hour. at. a. time. I'm a firm believer that fun is due to challenges that respect your intelligence, not insult it. :P But on this we'll have to disagree. [I'm kinda passionate about this point, actually]
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:33 PM
1

It's the assumption that "girl == fake" that pisses me off, especially while simultaneously declaring that they were picked on for not having the testosterone-filled rage of the jocks in school. Um, hi. If that's the assumption being made here then I wholeheartedly agree with you. I, however, am familiar with, as I'm sure you are, of people (even guys) using the female image to their advantage in the context of video-games, so it's not like this isn't a 'thing.' The problem is hyperbole and, as …
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:32 PM
1

That doesn't say that though? By all means, please show me. I have no problem being corrected on this point, but I don't see how saying that means what you think it means. K, i'm really confused here: Doesn't this statement say the exact opposite of what you're saying it does? 'Genuinely befriend' usually means shared interests, but not interest in that way? Maybe i'm getting old and my brain's not working properly here.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:24 PM
1

An eye for an eye makes everyone a blind-skunt.
/r/MensRights15/02/14 12:15 PM
1

And I salute them. It takes a courage that I, myself, do not have. BUT that doesn't mean that guys like me can't make a difference, either. Be the change you want to see in the world. For my part, I try to be that 'better-man' that society tries to talk about while simultaneously keeping an eye out for the bullshit one-sidedness. Everyone's guilty of something, is the way i view it; we can all improve.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:23 PM
1

win.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:20 PM
2

Worse than that, the women among these 'vogueing' masses want and expect positive attention from people who if they met irl would call 'creeps' at the mere sight of them. Bingo. This is why it's fucked up. Then what the fuck is your issue? Because they should be able to. It's our society's fucked up gender dynamic that make them not want to do it; conversely, it's also those game-girls who do identify themselves as girls for an advantage that contribute to this phenomenon as well. And women cunt…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:13 PM
4

If you're gaming because you ACTUALLY ENJOY THE GAMES, who the fuck cares if "the masses" romp through and out? It's similar to the phenomenon of game devs dumbing down games to suit casuals at the expense of those who like more in-depth games.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:12 PM
-1

Notice how the gamur grrl will at once reduce the male specimen to nothing more than his sexual desire (automatically assumed without fail this is his only interest/attribute), while at the same time will loudly declare him sexually undesirable. Yup. It's the female version of the 'male-gaze.' We do it to each other, frankly.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:11 PM
1

Edit: okay, I read this wrong. Whoops.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:08 PM
0

If that's what you think is going on here, then you clearly don't understand.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:07 PM
2

This comment, too, is a form of bullying. Drop the aggression and your message travels further.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:07 PM
7

I'm not trying to gain your acceptance. I'm trying to point out that you are as much the bully as the people who may or may not have called you a "nerd" in the past, and therefore do not have any moral high ground. On a long-enough time-frame, no one occupies the moral high-ground because there is none. Everyone's guilty of something. but the important point is that we complain because we want to make things better. If you cannot see how a group usually shunned from social interaction might be o…
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:05 PM
2

No one said it did?
/r/MensRights14/02/14 11:02 PM
1

What I am trying to say, and have BEEN trying to say, is that we should be able to joke about anything. This is true but it's a sign of inflexibility to be unable to do both. I can laugh at this in one context and realize how fucked up it is in another, both equally valid views of the same situation. Ninja edit for spelling.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 10:56 PM
0

by society FTFY. We do this to ourselves as well, and this exchange is kind of an example of this fact.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 10:56 PM
2

Except it's not a joke. Society actually views men like this. Tools to a fucking end.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 10:54 PM
0

I'm wholly against any notion that attempts to impose an externally defined, extrinsic value of a 'gender' on anyone. 'Perfect' man my ass, that's just a fucking tool to be consumed by society. Women have it right in fighting this kind of shit and we definitely need to do the same.
/r/MensRights14/02/14 10:53 PM
0

win
/r/MensRights14/02/14 10:52 PM
0

Because men are part of the LGBT community? lolwut?
/r/MensRights14/02/14 10:47 PM
1

Only on reddit.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 02:54 AM
1

There is clearly something wrong with this individual, and to be honest I think that's most of the extent of it. What bothers me, however, is the tacit playfulness behind the sarcastic replies. Reminds me of the whole 'racism is bad but lets be secretly racist anyway' kind of thing.
/r/MensRights27/01/14 02:53 AM
3

Mind-boggling. Evil knows no gender.
/r/MensRights21/12/13 12:39 PM
1

Thank you. That's all I asked for, and now I can fully render assent. Misunderstandings aside...this is immensely creepy, but shows the true nature of the beast we're facing [not 'feminism' as an ideology but the nature of ideology itself and what it does to people]. This was a good find.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 05:15 PM
1

And considering society's perceptions towards mens rights issues....you think only feminists go on that list?? Or put differently: since you haven't really demonstrated your point yet...Cui bono?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 01:46 AM
-5

And you've proven that this was done by feminists....how again? Edit1: after resolving that misunderstanding, it's interesting to compare the amount of downvotes that this simple request for 'more information' before rendering a 'judgement' got [something that this subreddit tries to strive towards in terms of critical thinking and the search for 'truth'], and the effects ideology plays on people [as evidenced by feminist revisionary history tactics]. Ideology can drive people to do truly madden…
/r/MensRights01/12/13 08:24 PM
4

This is what we need. More of this. Equal parenting is SO fucking important.
/r/MensRights01/12/13 08:20 PM
1

Sure.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 05:04 PM
1

I'm not. I'm not even participating in this conversation anymore, if you haven't noticed.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 11:35 AM
1

I've been saying increasingly less at each subsequent instance/interval of this exchange..how I could 'sound' like anything more than just that....nothing, is beyond me. I think you're clearly entering the territory of projection dude. You need some perspective.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 08:08 AM
1

And now the insults. Been a blast. Cheers.
/r/MensRights24/11/13 01:18 AM
1

Your allowing yourself to fall victim to divide and conquer strategy. This is where I stopped reading. You're effectively agreeing with me but painting it as if I'm the one who's 'wrong' simply because I choose to have a different focus than you. This is one of the errors of expression that leads to conflict. I'm not saying you shouldn't take things that route, I'm simply pointing out that you can't call it the "MRM" if you do.
/r/MensRights23/11/13 09:39 PM
1

Much of what you've mentioned doesn't fall under the scope of 'mens rights issues', but are more political and sociological in nature. You said it yourself: you feel that the gender aspect is just a 'distraction.'
/r/MensRights23/11/13 04:42 PM
1

Disagree. If feel like you need something other than the mr to articulate these ideas further. Cheers.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 04:27 PM
1

It gets their rocks hard to know they can make fun of people and berate you in a public space because there will be a group of people patting you on the back for it now. Bingo. Knocking somebody else down is a lot easier than working hard to bring yourself up.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 04:17 AM
2

Actually, it would considering that men's problems go ignored precisely because society has an empathy surplus for women [and children]. By default men are behind from the start where empathy and 'giving a fuck about' is concerned.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 04:14 AM
1

Because men are fathers as much as women are mothers? Think you're not seeing the obvious here.. Also: you don't 'own' your kids, but rather 'own' your right to being their parent (which includes access and making significant decisions, etc).
/r/MensRights22/11/13 04:10 AM
2

Mocking a group of people attempting to appeal to a universal humanistic ethics by advocating for their rights is the last thing a person who's genuine in their fight against oppression would do.
/r/MensRights22/11/13 04:06 AM
1

It's like everyone's laboring under one mass-illusion where the language we use to describe men, their role in society, and 'what' they are isn't dehumanizing and demoralizing....
/r/MensRights21/11/13 09:55 AM
4

When you take away a person's ability to make self-defining choices, you rob them of the ability to find intrinsic value in what they're doing. Robbing a parent of the intrinsic value in being a parent itself, is the worst thing you can do...for all 3 (or more) parties involved (children + parents). It's the quintessence of 'self-defeating-action.'
/r/MensRights03/11/13 01:34 PM
1

Troll.
/r/MensRights02/11/13 06:28 PM
-3

^
/r/MensRights16/10/13 01:15 PM
1

Heh, that's what everyone thinks..until they find themselves a victim of it, in some form or another. Abuse is an insidious thing.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 10:34 PM
3

Emotional and psychological manipulation and abuse. Can happen to anyone, tbh.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 10:49 PM
0

lol, sanctity? That shit went out the window a lot time ago. People get married for selfish reasons and stay only as long as it suits them.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 10:44 PM
1

Except in cases where the child isn't really the fathers.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 10:42 PM
2

Not really. Black feminists have been critiquing mainstream feminist theory on it's attempts to universalize a particularly racial experience across the board for women all around. By an large, the experience a white feminist in the western world has going through life is vastly different than, say, the experience a middle eastern feminist goes through, being in the middle east. The experiences are not going to be the same, and for many reasons at that.
/r/MensRights06/10/13 11:45 AM
1

So basically you're saying that even though it was intended to be disruptive, it was actually illuminating? Gee... Yea, no one's immune from the effects of dogma and corruption.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 12:49 AM
1

Jeez, I wrote my comment and then read yours. This is awesome.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 12:48 AM
1

But that's class, and then you'd stop being a weekend culture-warrior, and start being a marxist-socialist! /s
/r/MensRights05/10/13 12:48 AM
0

This is absolutely retarded.
/r/MensRights05/10/13 12:46 AM
1

I think you need to clarify what you're talking about, lol.
/r/MensRights28/09/13 04:30 PM
2

They view this in the same way as, say, a black person would blackface: it's 'offensive' because it's directly symbolic of racism and oppression, so to feminists, the whole 'make me a sandwich' thing is seen in a similar light (well, indeed, it is associated with sexism and oppression, hence why they're bothered by it). This is one of those areas where I think it'd benefit the MRM to agree with feminists here: challenge the underlying assumptions that underpin its symbolism. For a feminist, it w…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 11:43 PM
2

Why?
/r/MensRights26/09/13 11:33 PM
5

Yup.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 04:48 PM
1

It's surreal. It's like these people and their perceptions about totally normal situations are beyond bizarre, yet they don't even think that what they're doing is wrong...even if the evidence is right in front of their face. But society tolerates it. So weird. Like a socially-constructed and tolerated form of schizophrenia or something.
/r/MensRights16/09/13 03:17 PM
2

You know, for a concept so slippery, this is one of the better examples of 'hypo-agency' at work in our everyday language.
/r/MensRights14/09/13 08:41 AM
1

This man knows what he's talking about.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:36 PM
1

Exactly. Nothing wrong with noting the origins of these views, but that's still no excuse to continue practicing it today. Let the children decide for themselves...when they're older.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:34 PM
0

You won't find one. Society tried to rationalize chattel slavery, too. Beyond the answer 'because they can and they want to', there's nothing more to it. This is naked oppression: children who are circumcised (all of them) have no say in the matter and are be irreversibly anatomically altered. It's just bad all around, there's no way they can pretty it up with rose-hued lenses.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:32 PM
1

Don't worry, guys. This child's pain will be less 'traumatic' to him than her.
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:29 PM
5

So, according to her, natural advantage = natural right? Well, I'll be...guess those damned 'might makes right' folks were right after all!
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:28 PM
26

and due to her anger Christ, it's so naked it's not even funny. 'Lets find reasons to excuse it'. How about no, somebody's fucking dead. Doesn't anyone care about doing the guy justice, and not listening to his killer?
/r/MensRights13/09/13 03:26 PM
2

Agreed.
/r/MensRights12/09/13 08:08 AM
2

You asked for examples of how we could 'enforce' that. I gave you some. The claims about truth anyone can make, so I kind of ignore that simply because people are free to believe whatever they want (ie claim is truth). We're dealing with the issue in an objective way, here. But yea, I still argue that that line ought to be doxxing.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 04:57 PM
3

Libel/deformation laws?
/r/MensRights09/09/13 04:35 PM
3

Yea, I'd say doxxing is pretty much that line in the sand. It's a shitty thing to do to act others outside of your quarrel with someone just to get at that person.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 03:01 PM
1

This type of aggression is always about the same thing: establishing a consensus that the target group is not like us. Black male here. Can confirm. >.>
/r/MensRights09/09/13 07:03 AM
4

Or not. How about we go with that.
/r/MensRights09/09/13 07:01 AM
2

It's so fucked up.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 08:51 PM
2

That being said, I wonder if she's being too harsh in this video. Black women often struggle with image issue because their natural beauty is seen as being 'different' from the normal North American aesthetic. Throw in race into the equation and a lot of social phenomenon that we see regarding women (for example, them being viewed as 'damsels in distress', white-knighting, hypoagency, etc) vanishes. Because of their blackness, black women are seen as having more 'agency' than white women; seen a…
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:32 PM
1

Couldn't have done it without ya.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:25 PM
2

Her comments on male homosexuality were problematic indeed, but I found her honesty to be refreshing. It's so important to engage in continuous acts of self-accountability, in order to keep yourself intellectually honest. Sidebar: I love seeing black women with natural hairstyles. I sported a fro for most of my high school career, so I find it particularly endearing when I see a black women confident in her own natural beauty. Gorgeous.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:25 PM
5

I'm not claiming that women have it better than men. But if you can't find any empathy for the men throughout history who've had it worse than you as you sit in your air-conditioned college dorm posting on tumblr, then you're scum. This. So much this. It's a fact that shitty people would LIKE to conflate speaking about men's issues with attacking women (even if said issue highlights something about women that we're critical of, it's not the same thing), because it's makes it easier for them to g…
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:12 PM
3

Cuckoldry = male disposability on a genetic level. BOOM. Mind. Blown.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:09 PM
1

I understand too; I can empathize. Still doesn't make it right. She should have the intellectual and moral integrity to admit that, given the context she's operating in, that what she's doing is wrong.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:07 PM
1

This may be true, but that doesn't change the fact that it's disgusting. A) Murder? Really? B) Without a fair and justice due-process, innocent people die. Simple as this. there's nothing justice about it.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:05 PM
1

False dichotomy. Being anti-vigilante-murdering-spree doesn't make you pro-rape, but pro-justice and due process. Fucker.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:04 PM
3

Are you fucking kidding me? Rule shit, men are human beings. HUMANS are violent creatures, but at the same time, men are particularly socialized into our culture of perpetuated violence ('it's okay as long as we're the "good guys"') because, like other shitty jobs, somebody's gotta do it and the buck stops with men. It's not a choice that we make, but a choice that is MADE for us. LoL, rule? Not even people who study different styles of combat, fighting arts, weapons, etc, can be said to 'rule' …
/r/MensRights08/09/13 06:03 PM
2

Well the whole point was to abstract basic principles, but I agree that it's vagueness is problematic. I was just hoping to communicate the fact that oppression can happen to anyone; it's not a zero-sum game.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 05:54 PM
11

I just don't understand how any human being can do this, let alone to the parent of their OWN CHILD. jesus fucking christ.
/r/MensRights08/09/13 05:52 PM
3

You know that whole 'love is a risk' thing? NOPE! Not for this person. She wants other people to foot the costs of the risks she takes (because that's what the search for finding a partner is...it's a fucking risk).
/r/MensRights08/09/13 05:50 PM
15

It's called rape. OH WAIT, nope. Doesn't happen to men. .>
/r/MensRights08/09/13 05:49 PM
3

Dehumanization, objectification, and being used as a means to an end, rather than as an end in itself...these are the usual characteristics of oppression.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 10:04 PM
3

lol, nice idea but no go. I do, indeed, plan on having a biological child someday. As to everything else, I'm not sure i follow.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 04:59 PM
3

I agree with you on the sentiment of pride. I love to see men fully embracing their roles as fathers.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 01:54 PM
1

Shit like this just gets me real ignorant ('ignant')....I mean, if I was this guy, I'd have intellectually and logically ripped her a new one, with no regard to her feelings whatsoever. No one, and I mean NO one is going to get in the way of me being a father to my children if/when I have them. Period.
/r/MensRights07/09/13 01:51 PM
26

This is the model of parenthood our society is advocating - No, not shared, equal, and enthusiastic parenthood (that is to say, both parents are equally involved, equally responsible, and have equal power, more or less), not anything like that. Our society promotes this model of parenting where men take the lion share of the financial responsibility, while everything else is barred from them. I mean, literally, this is a father...actually trying to do the father-like-thing and he's being disrupt…
/r/MensRights07/09/13 01:49 PM
-1

I guess I can only say that it's not the same: it's not like me having more muscles than, say, a woman, is predicated on me somehow taking muscles away from her. Rather, it's based on biology and evolution, much in the same way a woman's ability to give birth. That's just called natural advantage. But a woman's ability to bring in more customers is not just affected by her natural advantage of being 'attractive'. It's also aided by society's empathy-gap for men (or whatever you want to call it),…
/r/MensRights06/09/13 10:57 PM
2

No, feminists would say 'But he chose her because he objectified her - that's patriarchy backfiring on you.' added caveat: 'durr ha ha ha, she's the victim'
/r/MensRights06/09/13 10:48 PM
2

I disagree. It's the product of hundreds of years of evolutionary pressures put on by women's sexual choices in partners (which is heavily influenced by biology and culture). Society benefits from the empathy-gap men experience because those men go on to become cogs in the machine that help keep society going.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 02:46 PM
1

Or, you know, in general. It's called hypoagency meets proxy-violence.
/r/MensRights05/09/13 02:44 PM
1

Like women-only gyms???
/r/MensRights05/09/13 01:01 AM
6

He was shamed for 'losing'. Your analysis of this situation is wrong. He may personally be a strong individual, but society still looks down upon him for what essentially amounts to catching the scorn of a woman. If he had defend himself, he'd have been equally shamed.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 08:11 PM
5

Men often think they have the obligation to stoically work through in abusive relationships and that they are to blame for the actions of their partners. Very much true of men, but also generally true of people in abusive relationships. Human psychology.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 02:44 PM
5

If you haven't heard the complaints, then you probably aren't looking. There have been lots of complaints and critique of the misogyny in rap and hip hop.
/r/MensRights04/09/13 01:55 PM
8

God, reading this guy's story fucking gutted me. Yet another reason why it's absolutely necessary to be sure you're having kids with someone capable of handling it.
/r/MensRights03/09/13 10:42 PM
0

Making an antagonistic thread is not in itself an attempt to be banned (unless free discussion is frowned upon, which then...yea, I guess you could call it that). So barring that, I can't see how you can conclude that he had malicious intent (trolling) there, let alone have reason enough to believe he'd follow it up with more. Got any more examples of his 'trolling'?
/r/MensRights03/09/13 08:07 PM
11

Because the opinion of someone who doesn't have the respect to finish reading the comment they're replying to...is usually very valuable and not trollish.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 10:44 PM
1

it's like you saw the direction where this was going...and reversed it. Bravo. Wasn't expecting it. 4/5
/r/MensRights31/08/13 10:42 PM
2

Exactly. It's that weird comfortable feeling that comes with naming the 800 pound gorilla in the room. You know, the one that's been maintaining the status quo. It's also a sign of oppression when talking about unfair and unequal dynamics in a system leads to being attacked.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:59 PM
2

Actually no, it's not. There are different forms of slavery and the one you're probably thinking of (which is prompting the moral outrage) is 'chattel slavery'.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:57 PM
2

You have a way of labeling anyone who disagrees with you as a 'woman-hater'. Not a good way to argue your point. Lets just stick to the arguments here, and leave the insults out of it.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:51 PM
1

No, it's happening right now. And guess what? In places like California where women are being forced to pay alimony, women are protesting every way they can. Source?
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:49 PM
1

Again, your model doesn't take into account important factors like influences/pressures, and relations of power. In some marriages, the man has more power, in others, the women has more power, so the situation's going to be judged differently corresponding to what's going on in the fore and background. The reality is that, more often than not, we THINK we make decisions for rational reasons, but we really do things based on emotions and unconscious urges/triggers, and then rationalize it after t…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:45 PM
1

Even though I disagree with your argument, I do agree with you on this point. Saying that 'on average, women balk at financially supporting their own kids' is a pretty fucking terrible thing to say.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:43 PM
1

I don't understand why you're not getting this but in this particular example (the one you're both arguing about), it's a rich (financially successful) father vs a reasonably successful yet shady (toxic selfish behavior) mother. Chances are the former's going to have more 'life skills' to pass on (like handing bullshit like this without losing it, for example) than the latter.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:31 PM
1

If someone wants custody, they might have a damn fine reason. Maybe the other parent is physically abusive. That parent shouldn't get custody and SHOULD pay child support. So your entire argument is based on a small subset of all custody disputes? Awesome. You're trying very hard to justify a system that positions women into a role/position of power (ie being the primary caregiver) with regards to kids simply because of gender expectations. Yes, I get that not all women like being put in that po…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:25 PM
1

Your analysis doesn't take into account a lot of important variables, such as societal expectation of men to be breadwinners (reinforced by women and men) and how this affects their chances of being able to win custody disputes, or hell, just being able to be around their family in the first place. The whole system takes this social fact for granted then just acts like things just happen to be organized this way. Nope. Doesn't work like that. Yes, alimony is ideal for a specific situation, but y…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 12:24 PM
1

You nailed it. A the end of the day, it's not really about ending oppression. It's just a movement for political and social power, when it stoops to shit like this.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 11:41 AM
2

Bigotry, imo, and this is coming from a lefty. Just because people disagree with you on the best way to tackle a problem, doesn't make them bad people.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 11:38 AM
4

I think the word you're looking for is 'dogma.'
/r/MensRights31/08/13 11:36 AM
2

Your argument breaks down at the social fact that men are expected to be the breadwinners. So yea...no. Not buying it. In a truly equal society where people are free to make whatever choices reflects their individuality, regardless of gender roles/expectations, then sure, what you're saying makes total sense. But we don't live in such a society.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:23 PM
1

'If this legal device allows him to be safe from being negatively harmed by any potential maliciousness I might bare towards him in the future...I'd rather not continue staying with someone like that.' Yea, big surprise there, bud.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:11 PM
1

Basically.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:09 PM
1

Yup. You hit the nail on the head.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:06 PM
5

Did this article just fall prey to the very phenomena it's trying to explain? Fucking amazing. Yes, the 'women are wonderful' effect is real. This has been demonstrated numerous times. But...the conclusion that the wikipedia article draws here is that....it's ultimately harmful to women for them to be seen as 'wonderful'? Well fuck me, not only is privilege involved but we've got an erasure of its very obvious benefits.
/r/MensRights30/08/13 08:04 PM
1

Fucking christ, is there nothing that's out of bounds where this type of shit is concerned?
/r/MensRights30/08/13 06:53 PM
1

No, but neither do you. You can go ahead and draw the conclusion that he was there if you want. I'll go ahead and draw the conclusion that he probably wasn't. Oh and I must have been misled by the title, then.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 11:12 PM
1

He pleaded guilty because it was his child and he felt guilty for not being able to save her? Sorry but your argument here isn't really supported by the evidence. By all accounts, this dude seems like a normal dude who didn't know how to handle the situation. He should have went to the police right away, but he would have been knowingly breaking up his family, and what loving father and husband would knowingly do that if they could find alternatives to the problem?
/r/MensRights29/08/13 04:10 PM
5

TIL: when a woman gets drunk, she stops being an adult capable of making choices. Shit doesn't work the same way with men, though. Huh. The reason why this shit doesn't make any sense is because it starts with a conclusion and tries to find facts to back it up.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 04:03 PM
4

epic troll is epic. 8/10
/r/MensRights29/08/13 11:09 AM
1

I do. That's just not what happened here. "The floggings have been going on for weeks. I've been trying to stop her. They mainly happen when I'm at work.'' He was taking action to try and stop it...it's just that his actions were too little, too late.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 09:24 AM
1

I thoroughly enjoyed that. Thank you!
/r/MensRights29/08/13 09:22 AM
1

You sure learned me, with your google searches.
/r/MensRights29/08/13 09:04 AM
5

While the "production of knowledge" can legitimately be analyzed in terms of its social contexts and political influences, feminists in the academy have too often gone beyond that to an attack on knowledge tout court. The quality of the thinking that standpoint theory gives rise to may be shoddy, but it resists easy challenge since that would require evaluation resting on something other than identity politics, and it is precisely such a more objective, less personal, approach to knowledge that …
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:34 PM
0

He made one insult. Wrong as he was to do that, his argument was still valid.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:23 PM
1

Even if you want to accuse him, you have to point to SOMETHING he said as evidence of such. You can't just cry foul, knock over the chess-board and declare the match 'invalid'. That's not how this thing works. While I agree with your criticism, your method of execution is lacking.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:21 PM
1

This is more a case of feminine, and not feminist, projection on the masculine. Women have an instinctive peer-bonding process, while men have a competitive one. So no, it isn't to my advantage to be a man when another man runs things, because he sees me as competition, and not "a brother in need of help". I've actually been refused job opportunities because of this, so please don't give me that crap. It's not just that, though. Men don't run things for themselves, they 'run' things for 'everyon…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:20 PM
1

It's more complicated than just being in a position of nominal power. Having some female managers in a group of men may prevent things from being a total boys club, but it doesn't do a whole lot to balance the scales for women in the office if they can't get in to Boy's Night At The Club either. Why do you assume that there aren't female versions of this?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:18 PM
1

To use the business example again, it might be a women-only conference that focuses specifically on the problems women tend to face in business, rather than keeping a focus on "general" (i.e. men's) problems. So let me see if I understand you correctly: are you seriously trying to say that the main problems that affect said business specifically pertain to men only? Or that because they're in the front that, somehow, leadership means doing things that benefit you? Is that what you're really tryi…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:18 PM
1

Okay, I'll bite. Women only gyms. Great, no? They allow women a safe-space to engage in the act of exercising without being sexually objectified by men (which, of course, ignores the existence of the lgbt community, but I'll hold off on that point). Awesome. What about men? Numerous folks in this thread point out that the introduction of a single woman into the mix changes the entire dynamic of the group, does it not? So, then, aren't men entitled to a space free from the influence of inter and …
/r/MensRights28/08/13 07:13 PM
2

Honestly, it was pretty disgusting and was one of the biggest reasons I no longer talk to her. Good man. Fuck people like that.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:54 PM
1

'Chilling out with your bros' will rapidly transform into seeing who can get buddy-buddy with the lady. The men who don't particpate in this often come across as misogynistic or gay depending on how they choose to avoid joining the competition, and the lengths to which they might go to dissuade others from joining the competition. It's sad that those people who do the demonizing often do so in order to reinforce the status-quo where gender is concerned: men who don't play the game the moment a w…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:53 PM
1

They don't view it as 100% toxic, but rather potent. Men are groomed, by society, to be 'protector/providers' after all....and what weapon/tool isn't dangerous if it isn't properly secured?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:50 PM
1

Sounds interesting. Care to elaborate more on this talk you had??
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:49 PM
2

I would have said it was because women believe men are going to use a male-only space to plot and plan to oppress women. This is because, generally speaking, men are socialized to be simultaneously 'useful' and 'threatening' (protector/provider model). They have to police male behavior simply because, from their perspective, men are a means to an end. Think of it this way: if a tool isn't in your possession, how can you guarantee it wont' be used against you? This is the perspective of someone w…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:48 PM
1

This is actually an example of violence by proxy: after things started to settle down and it looked like people were talking and trying to hash things out, a woman in the back threw a chair. Through that provocation, the women in the front threw more chairs and the guy that got charged, upon seeing the girl in the back being targeted, lashed out as a response. We can clearly see that said guy wasn't hurt or hit by any chairs, but upon seeing the woman in the back being attacked, he initiates vio…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:38 PM
1

Black male here. Can confirm.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:31 PM
2

Black person here. I don't go to KKK rallies and demand that they include me. People have a right to their own groups.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:16 PM
2

I'll just go ahead and say it outright: it's a fucking safe-space. That's why you like it. Calling it anything else but this makes it easier for people/groups to succeed in their targeted attack of the idea of 'male safe-spaces'.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:13 PM
1

Agreed. The problem here, however, is the demonization of a male-only safe-space (because that's what these types of spaces are, really, especially for men who like to be activity/goal oriented in their associations). This woman wanted access to that space and is up in arms that she wasn't able to exert female influence over it. As if that wasn't bad enough, she then attacks said space for not bending to her will, citing imagined human rights violations, and then demands...even more influence. I…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:09 PM
1

I feel like your perspective on women is based on what you've seen of them in the first world. In the third world, where women labor hard as fuck too, things just wouldn't play out like you think they would. In certain parts of the world, you have women doing the kind of labor that men in north america wouldn't dream of doing, like traveling 4 hours to get 70 pounds of water (on foot) and lugging it back just so that your household could function (mind you, of course, it goes without saying that…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 06:06 PM
1

Are you stupid? The fact that the woman isn't is also the outcome of that idea. This is that idea 'working as intended.' Men are 'hyper-responsible', even when they didn't do anything actually wrong.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:59 PM
1

Isn't it obvious? Because he could have done more. Typical male-blaming mentality. That said, the issue is about the loss of an innocent little girl and how it could have been prevented if the father had custody.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:57 PM
1

I'm the product of a 'single-parent'...at least for the first 9 years of my life, and that didn't stop my mom from giving me all the love any human being could. I fail to see how your argument is even remotely reasonable.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:54 PM
2

Wanted to say this, too.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:45 PM
4

When did it become OK for a guy to allow a girl on a date to split the tab? I don't know, when it became known that men are human beings too? Fucking loon. It's honestly sociopathic to see nothing wrong with such a one-sided exchange. It really fucking is. If you think it's okay that a man always pays for every date (or pays for most dates, or has the responsibility of initiating + you feel initiator ought to pay, etc), and you don't think that that's dehumanizing..if you don't see anything wron…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:29 PM
2

If all-male panels for determining issues that solely affect women are immoral....then what in the hell is this?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:13 PM
13

Downvoted for manhood academy. You could easily have made that point without resorting to shitty language.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:11 PM
4

So the response to inequality....is to invoke retarded gender-shaming? The 'man-up' phrase is nothing but a social/symbolic bludgeoning object meant to beat the heads of men falling out of line. Nothing more. Why in the hell would we ever want to make use of such an oppressive instrument?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:10 PM
1

They say that because it's more comfortable to them to blame a man. Simple.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:06 PM
1

I don't think he was trying to say OP did that, but rather saying that the entire group of MEN consists of small groups, such as race, class, etc, which is absolutely true. The MHRM is going to have to tango with these other issues, by default.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:03 PM
4

Both are wrong.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 05:02 PM
2

It seems that you don't understand the basic argument behind 'appropriation', so I'll paint it over in terms that you would understand. Here's how it works. Group A has some particular thing about them (a way of being, some sort of cultural ethos, style maybe, whatever), group B comes along and copies group A. Group B has also had a historical advantage of some kind over group A. When group A does X (we'll call it that for the sake of argument), they're labeled with negative stereotypes that are…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:46 PM
0

Who says they're not? Fighting oppression doesn't mean creating new circumstances for oppression to unfold. That's not how this shit works.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:28 PM
3

Gotcha. You're just a troll; you've no desire to even back up your argument. Thanks for playing.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:27 PM
2

How does 'getting property afterward' effectively deal with spousal abuse/IPV? Oh yea..it doesn't.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:27 PM
2

People need to lighten up.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:24 PM
2

BECAUSE IF HE GETS ERECT, THAT MEANS HE ENJOYS IT, RITE?!!? Yea, any variant of the 'arousal = enjoyment = not rape' argument automatically lets me know that the person putting it forth is a scumbag. The scary part here is that she probably, on an instinctual level, KNOWS that it'd be wrong to assert this the other way around. She knows that it'd be reprehensible to say that a woman who experienced any kind of arousal while being raped wasn't actually 'raped'. But for some reason, for OP's wife,…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:23 PM
15

This is more of the same: objectification and infantilization. Miley isn't responsible for her actions, so someone has to be. Why not a man? Not buying it. She's young, has money, and has an audience. She's had the benefit of being able to make informed decisions with little to no external hindrance. No one put a gun to her head to do the performance. Your friends are wrong and its understandable why they are.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:07 PM
5

Sounds pretty broken to me.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:03 PM
7

This part I don't get....if the conception was the result of an agreement and if said surrogate backs out of the agreement, how can they, then, claim for child support? Wouldn't that be fraud of some sort?
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:02 PM
5

Was thinking this myself. While it's a little one-sided, the intentions here are good and the effects should spread out to beyond the targeted group. Sounds like a win-win to me. Only real issue is that this doesn't address the male homosexual segment of the population, but that can be worked on, I suppose.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 03:59 PM
1

I get all that...I really do. But that doesn't excuse the historical fact that, yes, racists have been known to do exactly that phenomenon, and nothing you've said thus far addresses this historical fact. Now, I understand that in our modern times it's a lot more difficult to discern whether or not an incident falls can be categorized as 'that' (as you pointed out, it could simply be attraction based on 'difference/diversity). Oh, and considering that I actually live in said country, I think I'm…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:35 AM
1

Sure...if you're looking at the issue from an ahistorical point of view. Fact is that 'consuming the exotic' not a new thing and it has a long history and connection with racism if you'd care to do some research about the subject.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 08:36 PM
1

More or less, yes.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 01:01 PM
2

How it's often phrase is like this: homophobia against gay men is the 'fear' that men will come to be sexually objectified in the same way that they objectify women...or something of that sort. Either way it's bogus, however. Thinking something like this misses the forest for the trees.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:59 PM
3

In a women-only space, they don't have to be feminine, and don't have to worry about guys hitting on them. That's a fairly legitimate grievance, IMHO. Men, by nature, tend to pursue women, often aggressively. Having a space that lets them avoid those unwanted advances is entirely understandable, and acceptable. I always thought that this was bullshit. Don't like being aggressively hit on? Great. Then get up off your butt and start taking some of the risks. Lessen the burden the men have to face,…
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:46 PM
1

Think you've got the wrong sub, bud. TheRedPill is over that way ------>
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:38 PM
3

But hey! If we think twice about the institution of marriage and it's impact on us, or worse yet, we're 'commitment-phobes'. How dare us for trying to think about our own interest.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:34 PM
2

All for the crime of daring to 'love' said person. It makes me sick, thinking about it. 'It's broken' is an understatement for this..
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:28 PM
4

Not being with the kid is a sacrifice, too, then. It greatly decreases your chances of being able to obtain custody if things ever go that route...but hey, I guess some sacrifices are more 'normal' than others, right?
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:26 PM
2

Yea, with the spread and social acceptance of 'divorce', that 'promise' has long-since ceased to be any real sort of 'guarantee'.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:25 PM
4

Agreed. There are appropriate examples for why alimony should exist. I don't think lifetime alimony falls under the umbrella of that, however.
/r/MensRights27/08/13 12:22 PM
10

The question wasn't about accidents but about intentions: if a woman intentionally misled a man into thinking she was on birth control and she got pregnant, would that constitute 'rape' by said definition? Frankly, I think the logistics of this is too complex to be usefully implemented. It'd cause more harm than good.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 08:13 PM
2

I saw a 'this is evidence that false rape accusations are the product of patriarchy' type of comment in the comments section and realized that it doesn't matter if they co-opt the point, they're still going to be, at the end of the day, against the idea of men having legitimate issues (ie mhrm). So no, not really.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 04:02 PM
3

My question is this: if the 'teach rapists not to rape' campaign is nonsensical because those that rape don't 'listen' to such messages in the first place, what makes you think that a 'don't make false rape accusations' campaign would work? At the end of the day, shitty people will be shitty people. Perhaps this isn't the best way to raise awareness about the harm that false rape accusations can cause.
/r/MensRights25/08/13 01:19 PM
1

This is what oppression looks like: when reason isn't enough, facts aren't enough, and the very fact of your existence is a problem...most especially when you engage in the simple act of self-defense. Yea, shit's just getting good.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:43 PM
3

The same way any dogmatic ideology reconciles inconsistencies within their theory: confirmation bias, silencing of dissent/opposing ideas, and a lack of critical thinking.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:38 PM
2

No, it's really not. Coming from a used-to-be-nerd such as myself, that same stigma rings true across the gender-lines, though being a woman, in and of itself, usually makes up for the short-coming that said stigma brings (a bit, anyways).
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:31 PM
5

I'm so tempted to say 'that's practically racist'. SO tempted. But yea, no, it's fundamentally the same thing: 'YOU are the problem, simply because you offend our senses. As such, your existence itself is a problem'
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:30 PM
8

CS majors are seen as introverts drinking energy drinks, and having poor hygiene, which can deter people (women) from joining the major! Here are a bunch of examples of people who don't conform to the stereotype! This part isn't supposed to apply to men. See, if a man becomes stigmatized (ie being 'nerdy'), well he just has to change himself adequately enough (read: not be himself anymore). If he doesn't, well, that's just cause he didn't 'man-up' and learn something cool and cultured. Social da…
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:27 PM
2

Money that you otherwise wouldn't have owed if someone else didn't make a decision *for you? Yea, not slavery at all. Guess we gotta stop having sex if we want to not be caught up in such a non-slavery-like situation. Oh, and for further clarification, most people differentiate between more common forms of slavery and chattel slavery. So A) not all forms of slavery are the same (or as harsh) and B) the definition has already been expanded.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:53 AM
1

For not being able to? Try not having the awesome privilege of being EXPECTED to.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:50 AM
1

Misses the whole fucking point, joke or not. A) Women can buy whatever hell they want; nothing's stopping them. It's the act of proposing itself that's the issue. B) Women themselves reinforce this idea (the man doing the proposing/buying the ring) for various reasons (some including cultural/social, but others including personal preference, the fact that it benefits them, and probably biological impulses too). C) A woman proposing to a man has a chance of emasculating the man in question due to…
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:46 AM
1

Give someone a weapon and if they aren't well versed in the art of self-control they will most certainly use it when upset.
/r/MensRights24/08/13 12:41 AM
2

This is true, also. Both safe spaces and discussions that bring one's beliefs into scrutiny are necessary.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 12:33 PM
0

Racism isn't based on philosophies but on misconceptions about reality. It's a false-belief informed prejudice that's acted out in relations of 'power' and social interaction.
/r/MensRights23/08/13 04:31 AM
4

No, because his next response is 'men have all the power, so they don't need safe-spaces'. I argue that ANY human being, regardless of race, creed, religion, etc, needs a safe-space. It's called being human being. We all need a place where we can feel we 'belong'.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:17 PM
2

I feel you on that one, but I'd argue it's the mark of someone truly humble when someone does something like that. It shows that they're really just fighting against their beliefs becoming dogma by constantly questioning them and putting their ideas/views to the test.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:04 PM
1

Totally agree with you. It works both ways, too: you have guys that have romantic intentions but aren't upfront about it and hope to 'win' over the girl via doing enough 'nice things'. It doesn't work, but the reason why so many guys (or people, in general, since it could, theoretically, happen to girls too) make that mistake is because, for one reason or another, society has come to associate support (doing nice things for someone) as 'love'. I say this is primarily a phenomenon that happens to…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:02 PM
1

Exactly, which is why the mature response is to sort out those feelings first and foremost.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 02:56 PM
1

Or, you know, she's experiencing actual forms of racism by people who have almost zero experience interacting with black folk (and thus little to no sensibilities about the sensitivities involved in such a situation) and these people really are trying to have a 'taste of the exotic'.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 02:56 PM
1

It's that imputation of malicious intent that's the problem, though. People develop feelings for one another all the time; attraction isn't something that's controlled (and the person may not even be aware of it, at first). What, are we going to become the thought police and judge each example as being the former or the latter? Or are we going to acknowledge that sometimes there are blanket-responses that are healthy, no matter what...such as creating appropriate distance so as to sort out said …
/r/MensRights22/08/13 06:42 AM
2

If you know someone (supposedly a friend, to boot) has feelings for you, and can reasonably surmise that it's having an impact on how they interact with you, and you don't put distance between yourself and them if said feelings aren't reciprocated, then chances are you're taking advantage of that person since they're more invested into the dynamic than you are. This, of course, doesn't apply if the person in question keeps forcing the issue/insisting to remain in close proximity, but I digress. …
/r/MensRights22/08/13 06:39 AM
1

White folks with little to no experience dealing with members of other races/cultures? Sounds like a subsection to me.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 06:33 AM
3

But don't worry, guyz! According to the commentz section, it's still the guy's fault.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 06:32 AM
-1

Einstein had his own faults, but that doesn't dismiss the positive contributions to the world he had made.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:21 AM
1

And we all know how they accomplished assassinating Treyvon's character...but turning him into a black 'man'. Before, he was just a 'kid'.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:20 AM
1

She is attributing bad faith, intentional ill-will and generally nefarious motives onto a class of people based on their race (and gender.) Bigotry bell? ding ding ding Except that, like us, she uses empirical evidence and examples to back her statements up. She's not being a bigot, she's relating her experiences.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:18 AM
2

Do you understand human sexuality at all? Humans see someone of a different race and it's that primal switch that's flipped that says "they're different and I find that alluring because of that difference". Because that has scientific backing.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:15 AM
1

It's sad that you're being downvoted for using reason and empathy.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 05:15 AM
3

It's not racist to refer to a group based on their race. And he's not making a judgement on an entire group. You clearly aren't understanding him. He's noting the obvious sensitivities that are a necessary part of the interaction between said group and himself.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:58 AM
0

'Weird self-esteem issue'? Yea, because it's not like history didn't happen. This type of thinking goes into reinforcing the shit we're fighting against right now: 'oh, men have no issues because REASONS, therefore they're just projecting their personal issues onto society!'
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:51 AM
-2

If thinking that your encounter with group of people, who, in the past, operated on racist principles, might involve racism, then a lot of what we do here on this subreddit makes us 'sexists'. That or you're just wrong on this one.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:49 AM
2

Reasonable black male here. Can confirm. But that's more a function of my exposure to the ability to apprehend an idea without accepting it, at an early age.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:47 AM
2

Oh, by all means, do elaborate. You know, for us slow-types.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:46 AM
3

I didn't say purely, I said mainly. And often when you challenge people on the health benefits...what do they defer too, if not those other excuses? So whether or not they really believe them is not the issue here. If it was, then there wouldn't be so much push-back against seeing it for what it really is.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:36 AM
49

Because, apparently, being MALE and being in the KKK are fucking synonymous. This mouth-breathing asshole. Now, there is a teensy bit of gold in this pile of bullshit: the notion of a “safe space,” where oppressed people can come forward and discuss their issues without fear of being talked over or shut down by those outside their group — who have more power in the world and who may not have their best interests at heart (or who may just be Blabby McBlabbypants types). See, this is what happens …
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:28 AM
2

Yea but then....so does traditionalism. Any ideology, really, can satisfy these three criteria.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:19 AM
1

Except that you really don't know if that 80% consists of people who genuinely believe in the gender norm against men that informs that....or not.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:15 AM
6

The real kicker is that two-thirds of the women who offer to pay are doing so insincerely. And they get away with it because of our society's love affair with the idea of 'romance'. The truth is, however, that not many people out there are that good. People are self-interested, to say the least. The guy pays because he knows his value/self-worth is dependent on how well he plays into gender-roles and expectations/norms. He doesn't really have much of a choice. The woman offers because it looks g…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:04 AM
3

But the difference is that MGM doesn't really accomplish that, while FGM actually does (in some cases) by removing the clitoris and/or fusing the vagina. It accomplishes that, but by decreasing the functionality in terms of sex (though it does still do that, as a consequence), but rather, by limiting male sexuality (or rather, control it) via objectification. How many times is it cited that a circumcised penis 'looks better'? That's because it's been normalized and it sits in the back of our psy…
/r/MensRights22/08/13 04:00 AM
0

Getting your foreskin chopped off because it looks 'aesthetically good' to some people isn't an attempt to control a group's sexuality? Wat? That said, I agree with you on the other parts: at least the penis is functional in terms of pleasure. With FMG, that shit is just....gone. It's horrible.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:48 AM
1

No it's not. But both are important and the former is more normalized than the latter.
/r/MensRights22/08/13 03:44 AM
1

Because you're a fucking slave. What other conclusion can be drawn here with such an unequal exchange?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 04:43 PM
1

Because it's not like women actively reinforce this idea of 'men being leaders' through, ya know, mate selection. The whole 'man was protector/provider' has nothing to do with those male deaths at all!
/r/MensRights21/08/13 01:14 AM
1

You mean those examples where women rape underage boys and then try to get child support from them?
/r/MensRights21/08/13 01:12 AM
0

I loved how the OP said similar shit to what we say, then adds the caveat that he's 'not tryna be like an MRA n stuffz'. Funny guy.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 01:08 AM
6

What? No.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 01:03 AM
3

Agreed.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:48 AM
2

Agreed, but that works about as much as 'separate but equal' works. It's not Feminism that reinforces this but feminism.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:47 AM
5

Take full accountability for your own emotions: It’s not your wife’s job to make you happy, and she CAN’T make you sad. You are responsible for finding your own happiness, and through that your joy will spill over into your relationship and your love. Hypoagency at it's best. Anything she does? Welp, that doesn't affect you...no matter what. And heck, don't bother expecting anything from her in the way of her caring about you being happy..that's your job, bub! Totally balanced advice. Fuck us fo…
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:45 AM
3

'Happy wife, happy life.' So they say....aka fuck what you feel/think.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:43 AM
18

This comment wins. Once again we find ourselves at various intersections...
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:42 AM
33

Fuck all of that, i'm looking at it from the standpoint of workplace-related deaths. It's insulting to even compare the two.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:39 AM
6

The idea is that feminism (much like any ideology/theory) ought to be open to criticism, not that anything feminist in origin is inherently bad/oppressive to ment's right.
/r/MensRights21/08/13 12:37 AM
5

Disagree. We see all types of responses to the issues of infidelity in society, ranging from the most reactionary to the most laid back. At the end of the day, what's going to determine how the situation's handle is the cultural ethos behind the group of people involved. At the end of the day, it is, after all, just an exercise of rationalization.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 10:47 PM
2

Think you missed the point on that. The idea is not 'what ARE these movements actually', but rather 'what DO these movements aim to achieve'. From that perspective, spankaway's comment makes perfect sense: in their ideal form, the things these two movements fights against are systemic discrimination, suffering, and imbalance of power issues, etc.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 04:55 AM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights20/08/13 04:51 AM
5

Followed this guy on youtube when he and a bunch of other youtubers had an intellectual thrown-down with creationism (evolution vs creationism debate), and now I'm glad I'm following him through this, too. His ideas/analyses are refreshing, to say the least.
/r/MensRights19/08/13 01:16 AM
57

Not only that, but: Today, Chaneya’s mom Charade says she’s been drug-free for many years. In a recent interview with NBC News, Charade confirmed that she threatened her daughter with a beating, and said she can’t remember why she was so determined to make Chaneya say she had been molested. She blames the incident on a drug binge. “I [had been] gone for three days. And I was really deep in the grip of my addiction.” When asked why she would threaten her daughter if she didn’t lie, Charade said, …
/r/MensRights19/08/13 01:14 AM
4

Agreed, which is why participation in a must, imo. A lot of this stuff's interconnected with many different areas/subjects anyways.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 06:16 PM
2

For starters: Who is Kevin, and why would he allow himself to be exposed in such a spectacular fashion by a total stranger? And it's hilarious how you can practically set your watch to this shit: the VERY first question in the link places responsibility (control) squarely in the man's hands. 'Why would he allow himself to be dominated?!' <--- said by clueless fools everywhere. Hey! Next we'll be asking why black folk let slavery go on for as long as it did. AMIRITE?!
/r/MensRights17/08/13 04:54 PM
18

sigh Not sure what you're doing here if you can't spot the obviousness about this: it's the societal trope that women (and society at large) take the issue of women's safety far more seriously (in this case, the gender equivalent would be the response to women being trolled online) than men's safety, regardless of rates of victimization and what not. Ninja Edit
/r/MensRights17/08/13 04:52 PM
0

Two things can be done: alter female expectations of the rules of engagement when it comes to this topic (that is to say, find other ways of engaging in this dynamic that doesn't include making men jump through hoops for you) OR men can just stop playing this game. Which one do you think is more likely to happen?
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:30 PM
1

Women and men*. There are men who benefit from the reinforcement of this rubric in the same way that there are women who benefit from the reinforcement of a rubric of hypoagency. Same shit.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:28 PM
0

I've always found it amazing how they attempt to psychologically detach the concept of 'appearance' with the event of 'being seen'. Sorry but reality is not so kind: you may not make changes for 'men', but they do certainly see them. And trust me, women judge men a lot harsher than men judge women. Or rather, that they scrutinize them much more (they have more 'hoops' men have to jump through, after all).
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:27 PM
31

Or, you know, intellectually dishonest? If the 'patriarchy' is built 'for men, by men', then how is it that she has such easy access to it and can make use of it in ways that suit her? OH I KNOW, CUZ THE THEORY IS FULL OF SHIT. Yea, lets just erase half of the population's role in the construction of gender norms, and then blame men for it. Nevermind the man behind the curtain.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:21 PM
1

Source??
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:15 PM
0

Projection, solipsism, and even borderline sociopathy, I say.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:08 PM
2

Agreed. I read a lot of manga (japanese-style comics) and I can't even count the amount of interesting, unique, complex, and beyond 'strong' female character that I've encountered over the years of engaging that medium. Perhaps if she set her sights on something less 'mainstream' (read: 'cool') and looked to the periphery, she might find what she's seeking. But hey! Keep trying to set up shop in prime-time central and then wonder why you're not making any headway. No skin off my back, I say.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:07 PM
6

It's a bit of both, I'm afraid. That a female character is allowed to get away with behaviour that, in a male character, would rightly be seen as abusive (or outright murderous) may seem - if you’re MRA minded, anyway – an unfair imbalance in her favour. But really these scenes reveals the underlying deficit of respect the character starts with, which she’s then required to overcome by whatever desperate, over-the-top, cartoonish means to hand. She’s in a hole, and acts that would be hair-raisin…
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:05 PM
1

In a word: dogma.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 01:54 PM
1

Now ask that same question of black folks in North America....you won't get that same answer. Just another way that feminism is VASTLY different from, say, anti-racism. It's on a whole other level of 'power-trip.'
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:00 PM
1

I don't think I could remain non-violent if this happened to my child, to be honest. Fuck circumcision....no one's mutilating my children's genitals! (that is, when I decide to settle down with a family) And the thing that pisses me off is how it's socially accepted...for what?! Aesthetics? Does this NOT show just how much society fucking hates men?
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:58 PM
1

Reminds me of how creationists attempted to use false dmca requests to take down any material on youtube that refuted their point. The funny (and sad) thing is these attempts to silence dissent operate along the same fucking lines every damn time. Same shit, different outfit.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:56 PM
2

Yup.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:55 PM
16

I've said it once and I'll say it again: it's not an issue of distrust, but a matter of empirical verification. It's a scientific matter: until that test is done, men will never have the existentially liberating knowledge of knowing that a child is theirs like a woman does. And any woman attempting insert her insecurities into the matter, making the issue about her and her feelings instead, is not a person who gives a crap about issues that they don't (and never ever will) face, and is definitel…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:53 PM
3

There are more whites on welfare than people of color, but it is never mentioned in the news. This is true but the reason why it's not mentioned is due to social perception of welfare. There was a concerted push by conservative elements in the U.S. that stigmatized welfare and associated it with people of color...hence why there are (and were even more) controls on it. For example: they had a rule for mothers that they couldn't receive welfare if the father of their child (or any man, really, th…
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:44 PM
1

Exactly. And the irony is that this reality doesn't erase the reality that white people face too. The problem with the current conception of 'privilege' is that it erases the lived experiences ('otherizes') of those labeled at the 'top' (whatever that means) when it's really the case that EVERYONE gets it, someway, somehow.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:40 PM
1

There's a reason why, traditionally speaking, the labor/workers movement has usually consisted of white, low-to-middle class men. It's the last bastion they have to fight for the things that are important to them without being labeled as 'bad guys'.
/r/MensRights16/08/13 12:38 PM
6

It is believed she injected them to bring on a medical crisis in the hope that she could revive them and then be praised for her actions. Wait, you murdered children so that you could try to look good? WAT in the FUCK is wrong with you???
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:58 AM
2

People have a right to feel what they feel, bro. Just because she feels a certain way doesn't mean she has to take it out on you, though. This is what I meant by that.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:46 PM
1

So men aren't allowed to have good hand-writing? I'm starting to fall behind in this whole game of 'what will these crazy sexists think of next?'
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:40 PM
2

Nothing to see here, folks. Just evidence of institutional barriers to 'equal rights.' Nothing discriminatory here in nature at all. And QUIT COMPLAINING!! Fucking aye, if half the idiots attacking men realize that they sound just like the folks who were so kindly telling slaves that they 'had it good', chances are they'd stop attacking men.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:38 PM
3

She has every right to 'go into a bad mood' because that's her natural reaction. It becomes wrong when she attempts to coerce you into saying yes anyway.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:35 PM
1

This too.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:34 PM
8

This is clearly a side-effect of being conditioned to always have the power when it comes to sex...the power of being a gatekeeper and/or using sex in order to secure provision of some kind. In other words: it's the consequence of a shitty way of viewing sex in general, whereas one could simply view sex as an act of two equals with minds, hearts, personalities, etc. The intricate and intimate play between who human beings....but NAHH, let's not go there... ..>.>
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:33 PM
2

Not really over the top at all since approximately one in six boys is sexually abused before age 16.
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:31 PM
5

While I agree that a healthy sex life is an important aspect to any relationship (especially marriage), this language is all too similar to slut-shaming: you aren't allowed to have feels or do what you want with your sexuality. Your sexuality is the property of someone else. Fuck that. He’s a crappy partner, not just in bed. So because he's having emotional issues tied to sexual arousal, he's a bad partner. Right. Guess he's not allowed to be a human being. Boosting your emotional well being, an…
/r/MensRights15/08/13 08:19 PM
5

I'm getting sick and tired of this. I really am. It's always the man's fault when a woman sends out a barrage of multiple, confusing and contradictory signals, sometimes aimed at no one, other times aimed at anyone or one person in particular, which only she would know. It's always the man's fault that society conditions the entirety of his existence as the 'risk-taker' and 'initiator' and that often nothing happens if he doesn't willfully take on these roles. It's always the man's fault if he r…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 11:15 AM
0

Not surprised, considering the entirety of society is in on this whole 'lets not care about men unless they do things for us/are valuable to us in some way' bs.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 11:05 AM
4

Yup. The good ol' 'well men are responsible because they participate' hogwash, completely ignoring the ways in which men are socialized (often against their will) into BEING violent for the sake of others/their own sense of self-worth. Nobody values a man that cannot engage in violence (protector/provider model, amirite?). But hey! Next these feminists will be blaming inner-city youth for being violent, too, socio-economic causes be damned! Oh wait...I guess not...they're only bigots when it com…
/r/MensRights13/08/13 10:56 AM
5

Because men are invisible. Can't arrive at this conclusion without that. Fucking aye, these people don't even view men as human beings.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 05:03 AM
1

I like this. I like this a lot. It's literally a war of words.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 04:53 AM
3

Any ideology that attempts to silence the expression of ideas, dissenting opinion, etc, is dogma to me.
/r/MensRights13/08/13 04:49 AM
3

Red flags are red flags for a reason...that is to say, don't dismiss them, notice them! And i'm glad OP noticed them because he knew what to look for in a partner and found it (luckily).
/r/MensRights12/08/13 04:23 PM
1

More of this.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 05:34 AM
22

Heard this one several times. Fucking aye, it's like these people have no idea how disgusting they're being by saying this crap. 50 years from now, these people are going to feel like shit for being on the wrong side of history.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 02:19 AM
5

They're red for a reason. Glad your story had a happy ending. Gives me hope.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 02:13 AM
3

So basically this guy's living the dream. Not many stories end this way and the fact that he has a functional family out of it (more or less) and everyone's happy, makes it all the more sweeter of an end.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 09:48 PM
7

So basically you contradicted yourself, but explained it away as being 'ok' since all they really wanted was to not 'settle' (read: exercise the power of choice; not settle for 'less than'; reject guys that don't meet their criteria)? Gotcha. Know what the flip-side to that is? Men taking risks before they can even know whether the risk is worth it or not. So yea, excuse me while I continue to give no fucks about whether or not it's a 'myth'. That was never the issue anyway.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:55 PM
2

Exercises in manipulation 101.
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:47 PM
4

First of all, gross. Having lots (or few) sexual partners is totally fine; the problem is sexual health. If you can't be bothered practicing safe sex, then why the fuck are you jumping onto somebody without full consent? It's this type of inconsiderate thinking that pisses me off the most. And second of all, you awoke to her head on your shoulder...creepy much? Did she honestly think you two had a good time, or what?
/r/MensRights10/08/13 06:43 PM
2

I think that only a sociopath/psychopath would abuse such power in this way. Again, she showed several smiles on her face as she was perpetrating this act of assault which normal people just wouldn't do. It shows that she enjoyed it and really gave zero fucks about harming the dude. But meh, i guess we'll just disagree on that one. The thing that bothers me is that men are, socially and legally speaking, not allowed to defend themselves...at least not in any meaningful way. If you throw out as m…
/r/MensRights08/08/13 12:51 PM
2

The thing that sickens me the most is the way that this ideology/bias shields psychopaths from being identified as such, and being treated accordingly. It was clear what her intent was when she walked up to him (smiling, of course). It's like the perfect tool to commit the perfect crime. What the fuck.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 04:38 AM
-17

Don't really find any violence funny, tbh. Slapstick humor eludes me.
/r/MensRights08/08/13 03:26 AM
1

Okay, thank you.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:33 PM
5

Correction: they want men to use them only in a way that benefits them. For example, they want a 'kind, understanding, and sensitive' man...who listens to them and acts as an emotional buffer for shit they're going through. But take that same guy, give him some issues and you'll see how quickly their leash will get shortened. Sure, this isn't the norm for, say, couples based on a healthy sense of mutual respect and equality, but how many relationships do you see out there that TRULY mirror this …
/r/MensRights04/08/13 03:33 PM
4

You have to take that you don't read into situations things that aren't there. The intoxicated driver in question (the woman) got her fair share of sentencing. This isn't a situation where the responsibility is being passed off onto the man. And the law makes sense: you have to be aware of whom you're giving alcohol to, lest you become liable for shit.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 08:03 AM
14

They say it's still because they genuinely cannot conceive of any perspective outside their; they're blind to viewing things from the male perspective (even if that 'thing' they're trying to understand is the phenomenon of 'men' themselves...huh). It's an intellectual perspective that's wholly solipsistic. I think people should generally stay away from perspectives such as this.
/r/MensRights04/08/13 08:00 AM
6

I'm going to bring up a logical fallacy....and instead of demonstrably proving that it applies to this situation, I'm going to just imply that it's stupid to even question it. Yea, i'm intellectually honest. Second of all, does she (or the creator of the comic, rather) really believe that men don't experience that same kind of anxiety and feelings of insecurity when seeing distorted images/expectations of us by society? We're all human and we're gonna feel the hurt just the same. A man who's 'un…
/r/MensRights04/08/13 07:51 AM
4

That clip of the father trying to light himself on fire...that hurt to watch.
/r/MensRights03/08/13 10:45 PM
1

You're right, but I just wanted to chime in with this to point out the validity of the fact that race contributed to the issue and that this white fellow experienced a legitimate issue via his race (albeit incidentally) since there's a trend of denying the legitimacy of these experiences. Cheers.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 06:16 AM
5

But don't worry, it's not mutilation. And shoot, they're being taught early to 'man-up'! Fucking sick, all of it.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:12 AM
1

The guy was picked because it was assumed that he had no relation to the niece due to race. This is a gender issue being filtered through a racial prism, bro.
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:10 AM
3

That's what happens when you bamboozle people by tying in your own welfare with the welfare of the child via taking ownership of them. Oops, I mean society forces women to win a majority of custody cases because patriarchy. /s
/r/MensRights31/07/13 05:01 AM
2

Then instead of shaming women based on their sexual choices, you can simply say you prefer a woman who's exercised abstinence. Still can't seem to dig your way out of the hole you put yourself in, tho.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 06:11 AM
2

It's not equal?
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:54 AM
3

You're retarded; please leave.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:27 AM
1

This. So much this.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:21 AM
1

Why do you assume that it's still not going on? Slavery STILL exists in this day and age (though, of course, the dynamic's have changed, but those are always relevant to the times in which it takes place). Sexism still exists in many forms, and yes women experience it too (don't know why this is even questioned). This world is pretty fucked up.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:19 AM
1

Those images are literally racist and sexist. Why? Because they're attempting to fit an entire group of people into a category of 'less-than' (read: their lived experiences don't matter because..REASONS). And this is coming from a black man. No amount of bad that you do excludes you from the right of being viewed as a human being. Period. PERIOD.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:18 AM
1

The fact that you assume that the person getting yelled at is responsible is yet ANOTHER bias we have society to thank for. Fact is that the only assumptions we should make is that 'we should reserve judgement for when we get all the relevant info.'
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:14 AM
1

Doesn't change the fact that that assumption would be wrong. Empirical data is soooo necessary.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:13 AM
2

True and we're guilty of it here in this sub. That's the point of being sensitive to oppression and bigotry: you try to see it in it's more normalized (read: socially/collectively invisible) forms.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 05:12 AM
-1

Yet if the genders were reverse, you probably would have done something. Or shit, through in any combination of genders and it's still pretty bad all around. Kind of a shitty thing to do, bro.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 04:17 AM
10

Don't worry guys. Clearly the guy deserved it because he was being oppressive in his refusal to serve their needs.
/r/MensRights30/07/13 04:15 AM
1

Never apologize for being a human being, for having feelings, and for giving a damn. You wrote that comment because, LIKE A HUMAN BEING, you were hurt by their words of hatred. You had to express this. OWN IT. This is your identity: a human being that is vulnerable to hatred and abuse. We all are. And fuck them. Fuck EVERYTHING about them. They honestly don't deserve to be where they are; posting from their privileged positions of social power (the ability to direct social force/shame at victims…
/r/MensRights27/07/13 07:38 PM
2

Beautiful comment.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 07:25 PM
2

Bless this guy for keeping hope alive. :)
/r/MensRights27/07/13 07:20 PM
1

'Shame about the gender' Cuz, fuck being a man, right?!? Also: don't know why the tweet from the trans-woman is there. She's basically talking about how gender roles in society made it hard from her to define herself as female for having the unfortunate disposition of having a penis at birth. Sort of fits with the theme of this post, i think.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 06:51 PM
1

Nah; i've seen em attack gender-bending men as well. Really and truly, if you have a penis, then you're a target.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 06:49 PM
9

I make a clear distinction between the pain that comes from the necessary lessons of life (growth) and the pain that comes from forced servitude (socially coerced or otherwise). I'm clearly talking about the latter.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 06:28 PM
28

Not really. It humanizes boys in a way that shows that society's continued attempts at 'toughening em up' (read: abusing them until they go numb to it) is quite cruel and vicious.
/r/MensRights27/07/13 04:12 PM
3

Why not both? Or are you trying to claim that it isn't mutilation and/or harmful? Just because it's chosen doesn't change the empirical reality of it.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 01:24 PM
1

Settle down there, Hitler.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:52 AM
1

Doesn't make it right nor useful for this particular context.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:51 AM
1

Not really. In-group vs Out-group thinking predisposes all human beings to a sort of invisible hypocrisy.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:50 AM
1

Exactly. It's unfair to have such an expectation; gotta take things slow. Thanks for trying and please try no to be deterred by some of the more...unsavory elements present in this sub.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:49 AM
1

Single parents* I'm pretty sure it's the splitting up of families and/or absence of one parent that does the trick.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:46 AM
2

It is. And he knows it. He's just drunk; pay him no mind.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:44 AM
2

It's courageous people like yourself that show that all of this effort on everyone's part to 'get it' might not end up going to waste. I hope we all find the courage to be honest like this in our conversations with one another across the ideological divides.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:42 AM
1

You're drunk; go home.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:39 AM
1

I agree that it, in effect, is something different, but the idea behind it is supposed to be 'going towards the child.' The fact that it isn't is a whole other topic, but ideologically speaking, when people talk about 'child support', they mean the idea of it.
/r/MensRights25/07/13 03:39 AM
-1

So you've stopped responding seriously, I see. k. Ninja-edit: thought you were the person I was having my disagreement with. My bad. oh well, you're still wrong.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 01:44 PM
1

Child support = supporting the child. Custody of the child means...supporting the child.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 01:26 PM
1

I agree. It just sounded like you were trying to apply double-standards there. Cheers.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 01:25 PM
0

le sigh. If you make the argument that feminism has radicals and they shout louder than moderates, therefore moderates don't matter...then people can make teh same argument about the mrm, which kind of shoots your argument in the foot.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 06:07 AM
0

Because these types of people see men as 'ATM's', and any ATM that doesn't follow the rules gets 'decommissioned'.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:24 AM
0

Not even things for himself: BASIC maintenance shit, like work on his vehicle. He had to do errands on his day off and she wouldn't let him...
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:23 AM
1

Yea. I know a lot of anime/manga that take 'equality' to a whole other level. A good one manga that does this, I think, is HunterXHunter.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:18 AM
1

I like you, you can stay.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:17 AM
0

Feel free to read my comment again since it's meaning, apparently, eludes you.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:09 AM
1

More or less.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:08 AM
1

Good read, thank you!
/r/MensRights24/07/13 05:08 AM
1

Funny how she has a freudian slip there and says "men's right'...almost as if the very idea of men having 'rights" (or social issues, for that matter) is so cognitively absurd to her that her brain defaulted to the idea of 'men trying to be 'right' in an arrogant sort of way'. Maybe i'm reaching on this one, tho. But just to be sure, I want to make it clear that the idea of jailing a woman (or anyone) for being raped is absolutely abhorrent. I mean, it literally makes me uncontrollably angry. Th…
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:56 AM
9

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:18 AM
0

Feminists are very judgmental this way too[1] , as they oppose father's rights on the grounds that they assume the only reason men would want custody is to control women and get out of paying child support. Read out loud in a literal sense, that's saying 'Feminists oppose men having to pay for children (custody) because they suspect (assume) that men don't want to pay for children.' How fucking absurd is that? No, maybe the father just loves their child? Maybe the default ought to be 50/50 becau…
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:17 AM
3

It can be very difficult for men to express themselves in ways that aren't pre-determined by society. Women can dress, talk, act any way they want and be normal, but as soon as a man goes outside the strict male norms, people think something is wrong with him, that he is a deviant of some sort. If men want to be considered normal, there's a very small box that they have to have to fit into. This is true for both sides: women who act 'out of part' are met with the usual of cognitive dissonance an…
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:14 AM
2

You're delusional. Go to bed; you're drunk.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:06 AM
3

And if a feminist said this about the mra, they'd look just as bigoted and radical. Congrats on making the sub look bad.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:06 AM
0

The problem is that those who aren't radicals also tend not to be as angry and not as pugnacious, and so they are rendered silent by the extremists. You realize this argument applies to the MRM as well, right? Guess all those articles saying MRA's = radical misogynists are true! Or your thinking is flawed...
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:05 AM
4

Because 'men have it better' and 'men are more often bad than good.' That's the underlying assumption that goes into these kinds of things. Back in the day, people thought blacks had things 'better'; a more 'simpler' life, they'd say. Look at the 'lazy negro' and 'coon' caricatures: all attempts at saying 'they don't do as much as us, therefore they have it better'. Same idea, different group. Oppression is oppression.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 04:02 AM
1

The bottom line is manipulation; taking advantage of someone's insecurities is a form of abuse, imo. Not all abuse is equal, though.
/r/MensRights24/07/13 03:56 AM
5

It's not really about body image for me, though: objectification of men's bodies centers around the idea of use-value. Strong men are seen as 'valuable' for their perceived capacity to engage in acts of strength and what have you. The REAL issue is that society objectifies men along the lines of use-value: what can a man do for you. This is where the talk of 'make 100k, be fit/strong, be fashionable, etc etc' comes from. It's from this realization of men's lack of innate value, this center of aw…
/r/MensRights23/07/13 06:23 AM
1

The converse is true for women, except there aren't any rinsers for women that I'm aware of. Pimps/abusive assholes. The psychology is roughly the same since human beings have the mind in common.
/r/MensRights23/07/13 04:30 AM
3

This is a creepy thing to say. Though people are free to express themselves, they're not free to make passive-aggressive threats (even if they were joking).
/r/MensRights22/07/13 02:13 AM
10

This. No group, ideology, or society is immune the stultifying effects of dogma and the corrupting effects of power.
/r/MensRights22/07/13 02:10 AM
1

Because in his small world, women aren't people. You see, they aren't capable of being bad (moral agency), they aren't capable of power (social coercion, for example) or privilege (social benefits relative to others). For this author, women are in a state of perpetual victimhood, whether they like it or not. He even critiques a female author on her own stated views, as if they don't matter, simply because 'patriarchy.' The moment when you can admit that the history of women in society consists o…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 02:08 AM
2

Classic tactic of oppression is to deny the validity of an entire group's lived experiences. They try to get away with justifying this empathy gap (ie denying the legitimacy of the issues said group faces) by saying said group has no 'problems'; barring that, they move the goalposts and say 'they don't have it as bad. Any excuse is sufficient; the denial is made and the situation/problem is downplayed. Mission accomplished. There's nothing about 'women having it back historically' that contradic…
/r/MensRights22/07/13 02:03 AM
7

Too bad it's so rare.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:26 PM
3

Things have gotten so absurd that they feel nothing (not even shame) at attempting to coerce/bully 'kind-acts' (read: benefits) out of people. Newsflash: if it's not freely given and chosen (that is to say, if it is not a choice FREE from duress, manipulation, coercion, etc), then it's not 'kind.' It's just fucking bullying. Period. Yea, it's all fun and games to them (a defense mechanism to deflect the probable shame they're feeling at how naked their actions really are) but it's clear they kno…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:21 PM
2

Those are questions only the person (the subject) can answer, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 11:17 PM
2

No, it doesn't; it's stooping to their level and trying to beat them with experience. It's equally as disgusting.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:25 PM
2

No they did not. Privileged people are often outraged when their privilege comes into direct scrutiny.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:24 PM
2

The bottom-line is: mutual respect, fairness, and compassion/empathy has to be present on both sides, no matter the form that the outward dynamic takes (read: the social dance of 'power'; that 'give-and-take' that typifies a human relationship).
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:22 PM
3

We have to stop valuing (privileging) sex in the way that we, as men, do. There's just no way around it, even if it's easy to get. Value women based on their personality and above all else, the content of their character; who they are as a person. Pursue women (even if it's just a small percentage of these types of women in the dating pool) that treat people fairly and are decent, moral people.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:20 PM
2

The divorce part is good: no one should be forced to stay with someone they don't like/want to be with. The freedom that comes with divorce is a beautiful thing because it means that a marriage won't last unless it's based on a healthy bond between two people (or continued choice, even if that choice is self-destructive in the end). The part that bothers me is the part about the property: these women intentionally marry someone knowing FULL WELL that that person doesn't satisfy them enough to ha…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:17 PM
0

I don't want the father of my child (whom I still hold financially responsible for said child) to actually have access (read: to be an influence in said child's life and to partake in the joys of actual parenthood) to my child for reasons. Translation: I want full control and I want to use my child as a weapon against my ex. Not because my ex is a bad person or a bad parent, but simply because I have a grudge against them or I'm just a heartless, unthinking, selfish asshole. God, I hate people l…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 07:10 PM
1

Haha, indeed.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 06:51 PM
3

You're breaking the circlejerk!
/r/MensRights21/07/13 12:40 PM
1

Thank you!
/r/MensRights21/07/13 12:22 PM
2

Totally agree with this. I think the general idea is that anti-oppression movements start out against extremely visible and explicit forms of social oppression, and as they win more and more battles, it becomes harder and harder to maintain relevant targets to attack next...so they construct a nebulous boogey-man that can never truly be 'conquered' or objectively verified (because of the human mind's endless ability to 'critique' things/find fault with something). It's sort of like Manichaeism: …
/r/MensRights21/07/13 10:53 AM
1

I see what you did there.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 10:37 AM
2

I don't think it's an 'us vs them' type of thing. We're all humans.
/r/MensRights21/07/13 10:36 AM
15

There is still some debate on those sites as to whether Dilbert has never been funny or it used to be funny and now it isn't. I hope someone gets all of this sorted out before I write an autobiography. These are exactly the kind of facts I need to include. It's so refreshing to see someone so unapologetic for the act of simply expressing themselves. Or heaven forbid: present a view that's NOT mainstream. Fact: slavery used to be mainstream. The same people attacking Dilbert for his sarcastic car…
/r/MensRights21/07/13 10:22 AM
1

We're all fucking human beings so no, doesn't surprise me at all. And yes I've noticed the similarities.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 11:12 PM
2

That's why there's a social safety net. To take care of things like this.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:14 AM
1

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. The fact that you can't separate the innocence of the child from the wrongful acts of the mother makes me think that you don't feel that she did anything wrong.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:13 AM
0

The mother's misery for making fucked-up decisions and generally being a lying, cheating scumbag? Well, I find taking delight in any misery to be bad, but clearly I think OP was talking about that misery.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:12 AM
-1

OOOOOHHHHHHH. http://i.imgur.com/VQLGJOL.gif
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:10 AM
1

Jen's story is: She was an acquaintance I would hook up with when I'd visit my hometown, I live elsewhere. She got pregnant (I was the only man she had slept with), found out, but 'knew' I would have wanted an abortion or not to father(she's a southern gal of faith). She was raised without a father, which really impacted her, so she decided it was worth it to deceive to a man who was in love with her for years (call him 'Adam'). She slept with Adam, and weeks later told him he had gotten her pre…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 04:02 AM
1

Yup. And this is one of the biggest benefits that goes into tying one's own well-being to that of children. Contrary to what feminists say about marriage, child-rearing, and the socialization of women into these things, it's women themselves who push to be around them because it brings them benefit. Well, both those points are right, but I my point - it's beneficial and it reaps dividends frequently.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:39 AM
2

This kind of thing incentivizes people into getting lower paid, less-stressful jobs.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:37 AM
1

Personally speaking, I can't enjoy sex if I don't know (and like) the personality of the woman in question, since sex is more mental (spiritual?) than physical. It's about chemistry, emotions, and the equality of personhood, backed by bodies and fluids, all swirling together into one hot mix of 'win' and 'amazing. Ahem, got carried away there. Anywho, it's more than just body objectification. By a long shot.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:30 AM
2

Not really. Objectification in society is a shitty thing. It treats people as a means to an end rather than as ends in and of themselves.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:28 AM
1

A) As long as they attempt to shift responsibility from the man (who doesn't want to be a parent) to the state (getting extra money), then they're still doing the same thing of using other people to get what they want out of life. They shouldn't be entitled to anymore money than, say, a normal single mother would (ie the father died) or a family in poverty. And they certainly shouldn't get money because the father opted out (which normally would serve as a decentive), but simply because everyone…
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:24 AM
1

Good point.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:17 AM
2

Totally agreed. Most of the stuff on that list kind of struck me as inconsequential: if the individual in question truly doesn't want to be responsible for the child when its born (ie, the idea behind legal paternal surrender), then what does any of that matter? And if they decide to go back on it, then fuck yea they should pay up. This is about rights, not about letting people flip-flop based on their preferences to the detriment of other people's lives.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:17 AM
2

Yes, if a guy is angry at being treated shitty, and thus becomes an MRA, well he's just 'bitter'. But when a woman does it, that's perfectly fine and reasonable? At least apply the same damn standards if you're gonna make a pretense to trying to fight for equality.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:15 AM
1

The only way she could even conceive of this was by adding the caveat that the government pay extra money to whomever gets 'abandoned' by this. In essence: replace the men with the state to serve the same function. It's still just rewarding decisions made in spite of bad circumstances with support instead of teaching, say, that some decisions lead to a harder life than others. shrug The important thing for these people is that someone subsidize their personal life-choices.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 03:13 AM
5

Objectification is the realization of social perceptions of value in people. Hence men get objectified by their muscles (a 'manly' positive social value) and women for, well, their sexual features. It's a legit term and it's necessary for describing the motives behind a lot of shit we see in society.
/r/MensRights19/07/13 02:34 AM
1

I'm saying I don't know. And neither do you.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 07:20 PM
1

Btw, next time I'll walk around following you with a concealed weapon and see how you feel about that. Oh right, you probably haven't experienced being profiled before. OH WAIT, you probably have. You're a man. And this is the men's right's subreddit, which talks about that kind of stuff all the time. Stop being a tool; oppression is oppression. You can suspend your disbelief for Zimmerman but if Zimmerman was a woman, you'd be all over this story. (Watch this and TRY to make that same argument …
/r/MensRights18/07/13 06:30 PM
1

That's a story we cannot know. For all we know, Zimmerman could have gotten help with those 'injuries' he was seen with.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 06:28 PM
1

Because clearly thats how he imagined it went down. And not the other way around. Notice how they were using the language of male disposability to describe Trayvon Martin? 'He was a criminal, a degenerate, he did drugs, etc, THEREFORE he deserved to die.' That case was just a lose-lose all around. Zimmerman, racist or not, should not have left his damn car.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 10:44 AM
1

Me too. The evidence usually speaks for itself.
/r/MensRights18/07/13 01:17 AM
8

I've always found it interesting how the introduction of race (or sexual orientation, which is another particular one) can help people see a man's plight, considering society's empathy gap where it comes to men and the issues they face. For example: This follows a lineage of white women crying rape (yes, I said it, I said it because that was often what happened–unjustly, untruthfully, when there really had been no rape–I say this as a survivor who believes survivors and finds this an affront) by…
/r/MensRights16/07/13 07:58 PM
2

Really? This wealth of writing and that's all you could take from it? /sigh
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:05 PM
1

Wow. I'm so glad I ran into your material. You've been saying a lot of stuff I've been saying as well. Time to get to reading!
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:05 PM
6

It's a mad world we live in when someone has to even ask a question like this. More proof that men aren't allowed to have legitimate issues that affect them. 'Man-up'! Source: speaking from experience from someone who was sexually abused/assaulted as a kid; they downplayed that shit too.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:02 PM
2

What you're describing is abuse and horrible parenting. It's obviously left it's own impact on you if you're thinking back to it now as an adult. I suggest you get some good counseling and therapy to work through the issues. Your mother failed you when she didn't act to protect you from a violent sibling or from having to watch said sibling engage in sexual activity out in the open. Fucked up.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 04:00 PM
5

That and continue on as planned. Talk through the interruptions; act as if they aren't even there. Invite them at the end to join in a discussion on the subject matter (as individuals POSITIVELY contributing to the conversation, instead of trying to derail it) and, barring their matured participation, call them out for the trolls that they are. Continue ignoring them afterward.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 03:57 PM
0

No reaction needed. It's either at a bad attempt at humor or it's an ignorant assumption. Either way, not really worth the time it takes to think about it.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 03:54 PM
14

Feminism is broad and these kinds of issues are brought up, just not all the time. Sounds like that's exactly what he was saying.
/r/MensRights16/07/13 05:16 AM
4

Men are hyper-responsible, even when it comes to their own suffering/oppression. Who else is going to take responsibility for toxic notions of masculinity other than 'men'? Put the same idea towards women and there will be some further deferment, but men? no no, we don't get that luxury. When it comes to 'the buck stopping', we are the thing that stops it....(that is, society says we are), so of course we'd be seen as responsible for our own toxic gender narrative... Uggh.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:23 PM
2

Agreed. Both parties are guilty of the same things at times.
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:21 PM
4

Exactly. They're not talking about the man behind the curtain; the ideological foundation that underpins the entire socialization process of men - 'The patriarchal form'. Feminists point to this thing, say that men have created it, that men benefit from it, and that it's oppressive/wrong.....and then they go on to reconstruct the whole damn thing in a different form that's supposedly 'for women' now. But that's just trying to take advantage of an oppressive model that wasn't made for men by men,…
/r/MensRights15/07/13 01:07 PM
5

Yup. Can totally attest to this phenomenon. Seen it myself in a number of individuals (it's not just a male problem, but a HUMAN problem) and have experienced this myself. When you're so heavily invested in taking care of other people's problems, you end up neglecting your own needs. You weigh this neglect against a barometer (in your head) that says 'the more I do, the better the results, the better I am' and keep on going. It's a barometer that smacks against reality since those needs don't re…
/r/MensRights15/07/13 12:21 PM
2

Men are hyper-responsible...this is what it actually means when people say a guy has to 'step up and take charge.' It means being responsible for the shittiest parts of a bad situation. This is just another example of that. It was never about dominance and control in the first place - those were just a means to an end (how can you take responsibility for a situation you can't even get control of in the first place?). Well, these days, you don't even have to be in control to take 100% of the blam…
/r/MensRights12/07/13 04:33 PM
1

Glad i could share. :)
/r/MensRights12/07/13 03:54 PM
1

Zizek has a book talking about this very idea and it's brilliant. Here's a link to a mini-review of some of the ideas contained in it: here Violence has a simple premise. We tend to fixate on what Žižek calls subjective violence: acts of assault, murder, terror and war. However, there are two other varieties of objective violence: "the 'symbolic' violence embodied in language and its forms", and systemic violence, the "often catastrophic consequences of the functioning of our economic and politi…
/r/MensRights12/07/13 03:20 PM
1

Not exactly the interview, but....close enough. Here ya go.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 08:46 AM
1

This situation is too ambiguous to figure out whether or not the posters were intended as the former or the latter, imo. It's good that they're sparking discussion, but I think a gender-neutral poster would have gone a long way in establishing the fact that we're tryna bargain in good faith.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 08:40 AM
2

Even if it were true, it's still not justification enough to de-facto conclude that ALL mean ought to be treated like this.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 12:12 AM
6

'Don't be that black person'. Yea, that's why it's offensive. The actions of an individual is not a statement of truth for the whole group.
/r/MensRights12/07/13 12:12 AM
6

Black male here and I think your comment hit the nail on the head. We, as a society, are socially conditioned to accept that men are always potentially that 'dangerous other', but somehow when it's done to a group of people (blacks) it's wrong, for men it's totally okay tho. We socially condition men to be the abject absorbers and initiators of violence (society has a fetish for 'righteous violence', hence why there's not much popularity for TOTAL pacifist or non-violence moments), but then get …
/r/MensRights12/07/13 12:11 AM
1

Age. It's not just about money, but it's also about security. The security that comes from experience, skill, and 'sophistication/tastes', all of which are accumulated through age/maturity. In other words: it's kind of like co-dependence - they value someone who has the things they themselves desire, but in greater quantity and with greater hold (security) over those things.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:49 PM
3

And we'd also be pissed off if women/feminists were to make jokes of a similar nature (seen it before in this sub). So yea, not buying it either. Lets cut the crap, kthnx.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:48 PM
3

No.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:47 PM
5

Yep. I never understood the logic of 'it's okay when we do it'. As a black man, when I see other black people support shit that, if the situations were reverse, we'd call it 'racism', I feel both ashamed and angry. Why is racism suddenly 'okay' when it benefits us? (or stereotypes, or whatever you wanna call it). In the same vein, why is it okay for us to want to do to women what we perceive them doing to us? If you're that bitter about gender (on either side, which I can understand since a lot …
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:44 PM
6

It's a gender issue. A societal issue. An issue of freedom and liberty. Where's Mill when you need him?
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:42 PM
0

Men are a means to an end; a utility. A fucking item to be used and disposed of. In the same way that I reject the objectification of women as sexual objects, imbued with 'intrinsic' value based on their appearance (looks) and ability to reproduce, and rather value them as human beings with character and personalities, the same too do I value men. We're not machines, we're not tools. We're fucking human beings, dammit.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 08:41 PM
2

With great power comes great responsibility. If you have no control and no ownership (choice), then you have no responsibility.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 05:13 AM
1

Creepy indeed. No ideology is immune from the effects of corruption and dogma.
/r/MensRights11/07/13 01:52 AM
2

Since we all know that men are only as 'good' as they are useful, the name is also the promotion of male disposability. Be a 'good man'....or else! And how do you do that? By being a means to someone else's end.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 11:16 PM
4

Yup. White men are one of the few acceptable social categories to be able to stereotype and make fun of with impunity in society. And this is coming from a black man. I know fucking misandry when I see it, be it in racial form or otherwise. It's the same shit.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 11:10 PM
3

They're not being nice to him, though. Look at it like this: imagine a black person being told "you're quite articulate' with the underline assumption being that it's a 'surprise.' It's insulting to say the least. By attacking the notion of him being a 'hero' for simply being a dad, he's attacking the idea that men aren't natural parents or that men are somehow estranged from the world of taking care of children. This is important.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 11:08 PM
1

Nope, he's not. I'm glad he understands the value of not sensationalizing it like it's a kind of aberration or something. Also: he's one lucky guy to have found a great partner to pair with.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 11:06 PM
2

I'm sorry I missed this whole debacle, but I gotta say: you seem pretty cool. Humility is a rare trait and being able to own your shit is a sign of maturity.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 11:04 PM
1

Lol. Well, I like to leave room open to being wrong, and I also tend to go overboard sometimes in my expressions..so it's intentional.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 10:40 PM
1

Probably should, though.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 07:22 PM
2

Because breast cancer is a shitty thing and donating to it is a good cause?
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:48 PM
0

Men are hyper-responsible. Even if they're innocent and a victim, they'll either be blamed for not doing enough or have some story invented about them probably deserving it, all to escape thrusting responsibility (read: seen as an 'attack') onto women. This woman is clearly responsible for this vile act and it infantilizes women everywhere to pretend that she's not. To pretend that she's not a fully grown adult human being, capable of making rational decisions and taking responsibility for those…
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:47 PM
13

A bit of a red flag: she's worried about this THREE months in. She's clearly got issues and wants to find someone else to take care of em for her. She has no interest in a real, genuine adult relationship.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:43 PM
9

Christ. The language in this article is atrocious. When it comes to things that benefit her specifically, it's all about 'sharing = caring'. But what about things that benefit him? Oh, he's just being selfish. Newsflash: if someone takes offense to you doing your due diligence and doing what's right for you in a way that doesn't unfairly impact them, then chances are they don't give a shit about you and you're just a utility to them (and this extends to all walks of life). A prenup doesn't stop …
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:19 PM
3

Yup. Came in here to say this.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 06:17 PM
1

Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others. WAIT. She's saying the opposite: equality AND fairness. Sounds right to me.
/r/MensRights10/07/13 05:23 PM
2

Well, back in the day before modern medicine made giving birth a lot less shitty, it really WAS a life or death thing. Look at the third world and compare the mortality rates for giving birth vs the first world. So that old, traditional social-organic model of 'man as protector/provider, woman as bearer of children/nurturer' made a lot of sense...but now it's starting to make less and less sense as the times go on. Not only that, but the idea that women's role in that equation was necessarily on…
/r/MensRights09/07/13 06:23 AM
1

Hmmm. Indeed.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 06:20 AM
1

Specifically, yes. But generally speaking, this type of behavior is disgusting.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 11:36 AM
-1

Disgusting, disgusting, DISGUSTING. There are buttloads of people in this world who either have parents who want nothing to do with them OR are dead. The fact that this type of thing happens at ALL pisses me off beyond words. If you're a parent, you need to step your ego back a couple notches and realize that a child isn't your fucking property to do with as you please.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 01:30 AM
1

Humility is rare indeed. But it's also a vulnerability: people with malicious intentions can easily take advantage of it if allowed to do so. Just some reasons why it's so rare.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 01:28 AM
4

Being a man means being guilty for SOMETHING. Just a matter of figuring out what. /s There's no point trying to win; it's a rigged game with those types of people.
/r/MensRights08/07/13 01:24 AM
9

'Because it all comes down to women.' Yup. All about them. I'm black and I'd find it offensive if someone said 'it all comes down to black folks/POC' when it comes to issues of racism. Sorry but no: it's an issue that affects EVERYONE. Likewise, this is just as narcissistic, solipsistic, and stupid.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 11:42 PM
2

Not worth it.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 11:21 PM
1

Title should reflect that so that it's obvious what the point was behind the post. But I understand.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 11:21 PM
1

You're really good at this. Also: that actually explains a lot and put gender in terms I never thought about (a dualistic binary versus two completely different sections of gender identity). Thanks!
/r/MensRights07/07/13 05:25 PM
6

Having a penis and an opinion is wrong.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:40 PM
9

I honestly don't understand the woman. I do. If you exist in a world in which the concerns/needs/rights/well-being of a man is nonexistent to you/doesn't matter, then yea this makes perfect sense. This woman is a cunt, plain and simple. She played with the fathers heart. I prefer the unisexual term 'asshole'. It's extremely versatile and yet non-gender offensive. We'll just call her an inconsiderate, solipsistic asshole.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:59 AM
0

So because you dislike the style of prose..you claim it's devoid of meaning. Awesome. Great talking to ya, champ.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:57 AM
2

The sick part is that those who are in the system don't even realize how fucked up these expectations/thoughts they're having really are. It's the same social phenomenon that backed things like slavery back in the day. Back then, whites genuinely thought that blacks were lazy and needed to 'work harder', even while they whipped them into working from sun up to sun down, or even longer.
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:56 AM
1

Have a good night!
/r/MensRights07/07/13 03:55 AM
1

Because men have always had issues in society, just like women have always had issues in society. It's a myth that men didn't have issues, or that their issues are 'less than.' HUMANS have issues. That's the point.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 11:06 PM
1

You're welcome to stop responding (in the context of this particular argument we're having). I, certainly, will. I came here to discuss things, not to get into a pissing contest. Check the links I posted as comments if you wanna start talking about this stuff. If you don't, that's cool too. Cheers.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:59 PM
16

Attach your well-being to the well-being of your child and you'll be taken care of. It's emotional manipulation and it's kind of sick. Had a father do something similar to me and my siblings and I still can't get over just how fucked up of a thing it is. Also: Hadden's mother, Linda, said Friday the pair had already arrived in Rio de Janeiro on her way to visit Ava's father, 32-year-old Donizete Machado, when her daughter received a phone call from a mutual friend warning her that Machado planne…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:59 PM
10

Excerpt from the first link: Michigan NOW opposes forced joint custody for many reasons: it is unworkable for uncooperative parents; it is dangerous for women and their children who are trying to leave or have left violent husbands/fathers; it ignores the diverse, complicated needs of divorced families; and it is likely to have serious, unintended consequences on child support. Read that and nearly lost my shit. Really? REALLY? A) what is 'unworkable' precisely? That two grown adults have to put…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:54 PM
6

Because men don't need help...that's the point where Manboobz is concerned. When you come from a world-view that literally sees men as these malevolent, demi-god-like entities in society, rather than imperfect, vulnerable human beings, the idea of them needing 'help' doesn't even register on the radar. He defaults to 'misogyny' because he lacks the capacity to view men as human beings, fully.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:45 PM
1

Oh, i forgot. Only feminists can attempt to critique things from a critical perspective. WHOOPS. Are you aware of how you're sounding right now? Response to edit: Yea, I've seen that. Not what i'm talking about in the least. Critiquing an idea and examining it for it's hidden biases is EXACTLY what the MRM is doing. Using the term 'deconstruction' in a base way (that is to say, simply taking the notion apart), is not an indictment for anything. But it's kind of funny that you see it as an indict…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:36 PM
1

Okay, a good example of what I'm talking about is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc4XjWlx-fw StarDusk's video talking about men, biology, and drives. I was hoping to foster a discussion of this nature, with people sharing on what their particular views are on this, maybe presenting arguments of their own, adding value to the discussion. So far, there's not many open discussions regarding these issues surrounding what it means to be a 'man' and how we interact, as men, with one another. And…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:34 PM
1

That was a complete non-sequitur.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:31 PM
1

If I wanted to engage in masochistic behavior, I wouldn't have bothered posting on here. As for how this topic pertains to men's rights...you do realize that many men stand in against the very idea of men having problems in society, right? Deconstructing the forces at work behind this is an extremely valuable task. Hence this post trying to foster conversation. take your trolling elsewhere.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:30 PM
1

You're right.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 10:00 PM
2

Yes, this. more of this. But also ownership: are there groups of men out there that benefit from reproducing these types of gender tropes? For example, traditionalists? Also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKyQvfBQ8c8 Typhonblue has some amazing stuff on this topic.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 09:49 PM
1

Or typo. 'these' instead of 'they'. Okay, these attempt at trying to 'root out a troll' are coming off as bad attempts at trying NOT to engage in discussion. Or do you find it more important to be 'right' about a 'nonexistent issue' than it is to discuss things? And no, I don't assume all men are like that. And no, i'm not like that anymore. But it is a thing and I was hoping to spark a discussion about that...one in which you're doing a good job avoiding. Or not really a good job. Also: read my…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 09:46 PM
2

So..you bring up the phenomena of white-knighting...but instead of discussing it, you express your suspicions of me. Yea. This that shit i'm talking about. Anyways, I'll start. Looking back, I've come to realize that the earliest instances of myself displaying this type of behavior comes with reference to women (sexual-competition within my gender). I mean, being a kid n shit, you don't really know how to analyze your own feelings but looking back, I can easily see that that's what I was doing. …
/r/MensRights06/07/13 09:15 PM
1

Sorry for being nice and polite? These days you can be attacked for just about anything. Why bother?
/r/MensRights06/07/13 08:30 PM
1

But it's a comment. On reddit. C'mon now.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 08:29 PM
4

Men are hyper-responsible. But hey! We've got nothing going against us in society. /s
/r/MensRights06/07/13 08:28 PM
117

It's a word used to shut down debate. A blunt instrument of shaming. 'What's that? You find these clothes provocative? Well, aren't you the misogynist!' No, I think that wearing a string literally for underwear is damned provocative. =\
/r/MensRights06/07/13 03:46 PM
1

Power corrupts. Took the words right out of my mouth.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 03:22 PM
0

when people post random-ass articles like this, people have to bend-over backwards to try and find ways to make it relate. Hint: this story has nothing to do with the MRM and shit like this makes this sub bad.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 08:17 AM
-3

How does this relates to men's rights, again?
/r/MensRights06/07/13 08:13 AM
2

Okay, i'm going to start off fair with this one. Being alone, in the middle of the night, approached by a group with more people than your lonesome self, and with the genders being what they were, it's not surprising that alarm bells started to go off in her head. I can understand the reaction of her to threaten calling 911 at this point: she was concerned about her safety. We can argue the stats regarding rates of victimization for violent crimes all we want, but that doesn't change the fact th…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 08:08 AM
1

“You stabbed me,” he said. Realizing what had just happened, the husband and wife told each other, “I love you.” We're animals and we keep pretending that we're not, somehow. This is EXACTLY how I expect misguided, impulse driven animals to act. When shit gets tense and situations start to flare up, guess which parts of our brain does the most to influence us? Edit: Yea, and I'm calling bullshit. We KNOW that there's a tendency in society to see women as 'less responsible' (gender constructs/tro…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 07:59 AM
20

Because 'naming the father' has been one of the ways society forces men to take responsibility for things they have no business taking responsibility for (see: not freely chosen). This is why men have no say when it comes to being a parent (not talking about child BIRTH, which gets into the domain of abortion, which is a woman's body (her property) her choice, but about what happens after the child is born). Men are hyper-responsible because, shit, if no one else wants to do it, someone's got to…
/r/MensRights06/07/13 07:32 AM
0

This.
/r/MensRights06/07/13 05:17 AM
0

Because this is part of the norm.
/r/MensRights05/07/13 04:49 AM
8

Or that when it comes their turn to share the burdens that go along with being the primary breadwinner in a family (alimony being one of them), they'll drop said burden like a bad habit. There's a reason why SAHD's are shamed in our society.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:38 PM
20

Because men are hyper-responsible. It's as simple as that. Even when they've done nothing wrong; even when it's other people vesting horrible shit upon them, they're still responsible. They're not seen as vulnerable, human beings.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 03:36 PM
3

It's kind of both. From a woman's view, men want to 'use' women for sex (self-gratifying) and other bad shit. It's a world view that, more or less, destroys the notion of sincerity, imo. The fact that it so closely mirrors the real motivations behind gender interactions frightens me.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:53 AM
2

Yup. It's funny when people push towards 'marriage' when they aren't even right for each other, simply because both sides are being manipulated by societal expectations and idealized views of what 'marriage' entails. Manipulation has never been a strong foundation for ANY type of union.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:51 AM
3

The basic case which these two kinds of feminism made were: 1. Men and women are both equally human and thus deserve equal treatment/status in the eyes of the law (and society generally). 2. Cultural stereotypes and gender norms are limiting and anti-individualist. it's like I've been trying to say this shit for so long. Thank you, good sir.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 05:00 AM
2

What a sad state of affairs for our species. Fucking aye.
/r/MensRights04/07/13 04:58 AM
3

That's LITERALLY the logic. They ACTUALLY believe that.
/r/MensRights03/07/13 05:06 AM
1

There's so much sexism in this picture and it's just spraying in all directions. Dayum.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:21 AM
2

Can you imagine being in a relationship with someone like this? I can't. That's why I'm single.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:16 AM
1

Hyperagency: even when men are treated badly, it's still their fault.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:15 AM
4

Oh so wonderful: everyone gets to be an asshole to each other. Weeee, standards.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:13 AM
2

If she wasn't sitting it, it wasn't her seat. Are we throwing out all attempts at etiquette and manners here? Sheesh.
/r/MensRights02/07/13 07:12 AM
3

Wow.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 11:34 PM
1

Have you taken a look around here? People say things like 'all women are x" every now and then. It's not a common thing but it happens. And also: you sound like a feminist trying to deny that extremists exist in their midst, too. Also: your attempts at trying to 'label' me are kinda funny. Keep it up; i'm amused. If "feminism" was actually a movement for "gender equality", they would do what the MRM has been doing. POLICE their movement. Not letting everybody run around spewing all the hatred th…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 11:32 PM
1

Yes. Even creepier, then. Hey man, a couple 100 thousand years of evolution being shaped by the female gender of our species has kinda done that to our brains. Sexual competition and animal ancestors ftw?!
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:19 PM
1

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? That's how I fucking explain it. No one is immune. Doesn't mean that what I said is wrong, though. The same thing can happen to the MRM. The MRM harbors misogynist extremists in the same way that feminism harbors misandrist extremists. It's just a part of the nature of grouping together around the same core idea. Also: I think you completely missed the point of my comment. I was saying that attempting to argue that feminism encompasses the i…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 03:14 PM
1

Totally agreed. in our present culture of 'abortion = choice/right', the argument for pro-life is seen as backwards and oppressive (even though there's women who are pro-life as well). Fact is, it's just a different way of viewing the world, just as respectable as pro choice. Just because I disagree with it (i'm pro-choice), doesn't make it any less valuable for the reasons that people find it valuable.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:56 AM
1

Parent obligations are the right of the child? Tell that to children put up for adoption/dropped off at safe havens... This person is up on some bullshit. If financial abortion makes 'women and children' more 'vulnerable', then said women need to start making better choices with all that damn power and autonomy they have (in regards to whose children they decide to have, that is). That's what it means to have agency and choice. Also: nothing wrong with women choosing to go it alone in terms of p…
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:52 AM
-9

SAY IT AGAAAAAAIn. I'm sorry, I can't take this shit seriously. Edit: And the second shove wasn't necessary. I get it; she's damaging property and you want her to stop. But getting physical again was over the top. She wasn't attacking anyone at that point. Then again, if it was a man doing it, he'd probably be treated a lot worse than that. Says something about our society and it's love of violence. Edit2: I don't know why this is here.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:46 AM
2

Translation: Male suicide rate caused by....men in society. BOOYAH! Nailed it.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:41 AM
1

Website looks sketch.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:41 AM
1

Human psychology, bro.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:37 AM
1

She gets it, folks. cheers
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:37 AM
1

One does not simply logic their way out of an appeal to emotion. I'm not sure you understand what we're up against.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:36 AM
2

Feminism is about WOMEN'S issues, and to be sure, women have issues in society today. But that's it. Feminism isn't some umbrella concept meant to handle issues outside of women issues in the same way that the MRM isn't equipped to handle issues outside of those that affect men. Attempting to argue otherwise is an attempt to trick people. Nothing more.
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:30 AM
1

medical issue?
/r/MensRights29/06/13 06:27 AM
3

As a group we've often traveled to meetups and protestations to combat and show our support that legislation against abortion and the like is sickening - and they've accused me of that? They know that, objectively speaking, you aren't a supporter of those things (hence your actions at protesting them). They SAY that you are, however, as a means of exercising power and control: by branding you X, they effectively cut off your voice and label you as 'the other.' Your opinion no longer holds weight…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:21 PM
2

Social coercion at its finest. Society really is a shitty thing at times. Oh, you want to live your life as you see fit as long as it doesn't hurt anyone? NOPE! TROLOLOLOL, here's a list of expectations that we're gonna just throw at you BECAUSE.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:06 PM
-1

It's not.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:05 PM
21

This. Context is important.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 05:02 PM
-1

This.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:41 PM
3

No women slave owners? Really? Sexist AND racist.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:41 PM
3

'Abortion rights' is a misnomer. It has nothing to do with abortion rights (control over the process of giving birth) since that has to do solely with the woman and her body. Rather, it's about PARENTAL rights (the right to choose to be a parent). Society doesn't hold women to the standard that just because they gave birth, they HAVE to be a parent. They can give the child up for adoption, take the child to a safe haven, etc. This is, in effect, the RIGHT to CHOOSE to be a parent. Women exercise…
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:22 PM
2

Yup, I love it when I see those types of arguments. I simply go "switch genders and you'd be on the wrong side of the abortion debate" and watch the chaos ensue.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:19 PM
2

That's the thing about beliefs: if you don't check them with reality, they can quickly fall into dogma. Human beings have a general tendency towards oppressive behavior, I think.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:18 PM
0

Yep.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:09 PM
-1

Then fuck the rest of society for instilling that nonsensical fear in em.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:08 PM
0

Exactly. It's shitty, I know. VERY shitty. But abandoning a child in need is even shittier, imo. Edit: You've said what I've been trying to say but with much more eloquence. Thank you.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:07 PM
-1

lol no. I understand where you're coming from (ie that you should find yourself important enough to think about your personal safety too) but I still disagree. Children don't have a choice of whether or not they're born into this world. We're all collectively responsible for the fuckery they experience.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:06 PM
0

Also true. I'm not saying it like you should embrace disposbility to help an innocent child, gotta keep yourself safe too, but I'm just saying if not 'you', then who? It's an innocent child, for pete's sake.
/r/MensRights28/06/13 12:05 PM
-18

innocent child.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:36 PM
-2

It's funny how these people think: when it comes to abortion, the baby (because that's what it is, a human life...I have no qualms about calling it what it is. We kill for a lot less important reasons than the sovereignty of a person's body) isn't human. It's just a parasite. When the baby's born, but the mother doesn't want to be a parent, then it's a human alright..just someone else's responsibility. But if she actually wants to raise the child, then ZOMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN. Suddenly this h…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:36 PM
-24

Why? Chances are that if the shit hits the fan, it's because of other people's erroneous conclusions. Why the fuck should that stop you from helping an innocent child, tho?
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:14 PM
-7

Don't know why you're being downvoted. The risks of this happening are quite small. Of course, it doesn't mean other things can't happen, but generally speaking, helping people tends to put the person trying to help in a lot more danger than they're usually aware of.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 03:13 PM
2

The sad thing is that they aren't even aware that they're engaging the same subset of 'tools' that all oppressive people use: ignoring discourse/reasoned argument, being unopen to opposing world views, and flat-out shutting down anything the 'other' has to say. And I like how they're saying it was MEN who did this to them and not republicans (a political party) or conservatism (a political ideology) or the pro-life movement (socio-political ideology). Nope, just men. As if there weren't of score…
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:55 AM
1

We all got paid the same. Yup, same here.
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:45 AM
1

But that's not power, so it doesn't count. /s
/r/MensRights27/06/13 11:39 AM
1

you added radical in there....but I digress. Through simply understanding why that person believes what they do, and then respecting the fact that they do.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 05:16 PM
0

Why are you getting down-voted? I don't understand??
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:44 AM
0

Don't want to rely on empirical data? Congrats on converting your beliefs into dogma.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:42 AM
7

I really need to read this book.
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:39 AM
2

This. That's not a healthy response for ANY child to have (speaking from experience growing up).
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:33 AM
2

I know there's a big anti-feminist sentiment in this subreddit, but I liken something like this to someone saying 'don't bother msging if you're a feminist!'. It's a ridiculous stance to take, imho. Everyone has the right (and moral imperative, I'd add) to fight for their rights and to further their interests. Feminism does just that (flaws or no-flaws, whichever your view is). It's an attempt to keep yourself from having to be exposed to competing views about the world...it's an attempt at lowe…
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:26 AM
1

Nope, but it's on my 'to read' list. (hint: it's a very long list :( )
/r/MensRights26/06/13 04:20 AM
2

Sorrily disagree with you on that one.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:57 PM
2

Exactly. When people say "ESPECIALLY women and children", what they really mean is this: "Since violence is always a constant (violence in the name of society), someone's got to take the fall...might as well be men." People don't embrace concepts like 'non-violence' because society has a fetish for violence it views 'useful' (read: 'justice').
/r/MensRights25/06/13 02:00 PM
6

Your hostility IS the circle-jerk. Or wasn't that obvious from my comment/observation? And "GWW" isn't calling someone out by name. Gotcha. Welcome to my 'do not read again..ever' list. Hope your enjoy your stay. It's permanent.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 06:33 AM
7

You know, I was with you right up until your attempted circle-jerk and calling out of names.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:56 AM
2

Well, you can start by posting this to your facebook and seeing what happens, instead of complaining about it. :P
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:51 AM
0

Okay! We get it. But you're not exactly helping to create an environment conducive to a cross-ideological-camp conversation on this topic matter with a comment like this, are you?
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:50 AM
4

Their article on men being generic is spot on. People always talk about the 'universal' aspect (quality) of 'maleness' (you see this concept a lot in, say, critical theory), which is disparaged for it's ubiquity, seemingly endless freedom to 'be', yada yada. But what this conceptualization misses is the fact that that 'universality' is predicated on 'maleness' being nothing but a series of doings. That is to say, if a man doesn't do "anything", he's not even seen as nothing..he's seen as 'less-t…
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:31 AM
10

It baffles me that society is having such a hard time grasping the concept that nobody will do something that's bad for them unless they're being manipulated or forced into doing it. It's just that simple. It's like the entirety of our collective imagination is devoid of the any sort of conceptualization of men doing things for themselves...because it benefits them. I'd reckon this also is (part of) the reason that goes behind the 'man-up' slogans..as if shaming people into doing something ever …
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:13 AM
2

She doesn't ignore it; she reinforces the social fact that the ONLY acceptable absorbers of abject violence in society are men. That's our 'role'. Sidebar: i've always wondered why non-violence movements had such appeal to me. Now I know why: because they give a damn.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:09 AM
10

Slavery didn't exist with the permission of the slaves, ya know. I wouldn't put it past society to try that shit again.
/r/MensRights25/06/13 05:07 AM
15

Can we just, like, NOT do this? Thanks. Not really an argument so much as a 'this is kind of a shitty thing we're doing' type of comment/observation. I appreciated the fact that he took time out of his life to do an ama. Isn't that enough?
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:20 PM
3

We appreciate you doing the ama, don't worry.
/r/MensRights24/06/13 05:19 PM
1

I dunno..the question I posed in my fricken comment? Rocket science...
/r/MensRights19/06/13 07:08 PM
2

This is a very creepy comment. Conspiracy theorist, much?
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:07 PM
1

So that's a big 'no, it really wasn't.' Gotcha
/r/MensRights19/06/13 02:06 PM
14

This. Social coercion is a terrible thing. Mill said it best: if you aren't constantly defending your beliefs/demonstrating their veracity, how can you be sure your beliefs haven't slipped into the domain of dogma?
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:26 AM
2

You're right but...I don't really think this needs to be here. Sounds like a simple miscommunication to me. Downvotes are a part of reddit.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:21 AM
8

Was that judgement of her appearance really necessary? Really?
/r/MensRights18/06/13 06:08 AM
1

Exactly. Just walk the fuck the away.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 05:30 AM
5

Not really. Are you regularly put through rigorous, strenuous activity at work? Do you work in a dangerous environment? Unless you get a thrill from those things (which isn't impossible), then it's not. Raising your kids won't put your life in danger, unless they happen to be put in danger themselves.
/r/MensRights18/06/13 02:40 AM
8

ITT: women don't know what they want. (or maybe they want it all? Equally confusing)
/r/MensRights17/06/13 05:34 PM
7

This too. The way these critiques of the attacks on women ignore the totally interchangable versions of attacks on men is bothersome. Hell, family and private life are ALWAYS fodder for people to use to attack politicians with, but what they do in the privacy of their own homes has little to do with their political track-records or their policies.
/r/MensRights17/06/13 04:54 PM
6

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/women-plus-power-equals-discomfort/article4216041/ Bashevkin has a great book on this very phenomenon. I've read it before but wasn't able to put it into a complete picture until I discovered the MRM and get 'the other half of the equation'. Women in power often get critiqued on their appearance due to genders roles/views in society, but not exactly the way most people think. Bashevkin points out that there's a social (and I'd argue cognitive) discomfort that …
/r/MensRights17/06/13 04:52 PM
1

Yes and no. When it comes to abortion, it's 'woman's body, woman's choice', and that's the way it SHOULD be. But the question of giving birth is a question DIFFERENT from the question of being a parent. Women (and men, to an extent) can give children up for adoption. Women can also drop of newborns at 'safe-havens'. The question (or rather 'choice') of being a parent is something that needs to be treated equally. In the same way that men can't force a woman to be a parent, women shouldn't be abl…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:45 PM
3

My suggestion to feminists who want to make the political personal is to flirt ferociously with garbos and ask one on a date. I guarantee if things go well, there won’t be any awkward conversations the next morning; he will have been up at 3am and back on the bins for hours. Beautiful.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:42 PM
15

Yea, that's an interesting point. At what point is support 'enough'? The minimum necessary? A reasonable living standard?
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:35 PM
5

Talk about profiting from one's crime. This is a lose-lose all around.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:29 PM
3

Because those mra's who did it were wrong. The day isn't about making statements; it's about appreciating the roles of 'mother' and 'father' respectfully.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:20 PM
1

Exactly. It's more of the same; social conditioning. Look, men don't need women telling them 'what's good for them,' no more than women need men telling them 'what's good for them.' We each need to tell our own stories, own up to it (take responsibility), figure out where we are, and where to go from then on. Self-determination is the only way.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:12 PM
4

Those same arguments were made against women having the right to choose to have a child (ie abortion rights). They didn't work then and they don't work now.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 10:09 PM
2

Or, you know, they could just not chase. People treat you to the extent that you allow them to. If those women want to keep making such choices, and with the shift in the economy occurring as we speak, it'll soon be them who'll find the pool of shrinking. I mean, this isn't even a matter of gender, but a matter of economics and demographics. And besides, there's more to a marriage than just earning potential. That's an important aspect, but it's by-far not the only one. It almost seems as if the…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 06:56 AM
3

11 year old boys have as much agency as female adults, it seems, since that language suggests they were both equal participants. It's shit like this that contributes to the suffering of males. Hyper-agency. Oh, something bad happened to you? Well chances are it happened because you didn't do something (or did something; either or). And here's a billion things you can do about it so you can solve the problem and get on with the business of shutting up about it, I mean 'man-up.' Because it's not l…
/r/MensRights16/06/13 06:02 AM
5

See, this is one of the things that deeply bothers me about the state of affairs regarding gender in our society. When our gendered constructs become so damn entrenched that we cannot even accurately describe a situation that happened in reality without warping the truth to fit our socially pre-conceived expectations of the behavior of the participants in the situationm then something's very very wrong. It's smacks of the same kind of mental 'wtf' that something like scientology would invoke.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 05:53 AM
3

Presumably find someone who'd be okay with them pursuing a less demanding job so that they can have a better work/life balance. In other words: pick better partners. Set a certain standard.
/r/MensRights16/06/13 05:49 AM
-5

This. I think the mistake a lot of men make is allowing the mother to take control of the children and child-rearing. Or rather, I should say, by not stepping up and taking as much, if not more, of an interest in the upbringing of their kids as the mother does. If you're not there putting in the work to raise your own kids, you're gonna have a bad time.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 09:57 PM
1

I find it confusing that you seem to separate "social" and "the economy." The economy is social relations.. it is simply those social relations which involve production, exchange and consumption. What about in a hunter-gatherer society? Did the economy exist then, too? I separate them point out the different ways of examining the same social phenomena, and to possibly see things from new angles to discern new truths. (or at least i try to, anyway) But I agree that, for all intents and purposes, …
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:41 AM
5

It's more than just theft, though: it's the real pain of the opportunity cost bourne through such deception. Any time, money, and energy spent/invested into a false relationship (or rather, a relationship with a child created on false-pretenses), robs the man of the opportunity to pursue biological (or otherwise freely chosen) kids of his own. It means that he will contribute his life-blood to a family that's not really 'his'. He'll have no ownership, and thus no real connection, to the family (…
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:29 AM
2

Considering that up/down-votes are, more or less, invisible, the best evidence that can be gathered....is circumstantial evidence.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:22 AM
5

Dude has a point. Feminism has nothing to do with whether or not you think the kid was doing something devious in that story. You're linking the two in your head. Nothing more.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:17 AM
8

These kinds of stories (of children being sexualized by adults) gives me a special kind of disgusted feeling in the pit of my gut. It's sick beyond imagination.
/r/MensRights15/06/13 04:08 AM
1

Well yea, the idea of prostitution, I think, is that it comes into existence with the formation of any type of economy. Barring that, it remains in a sort of primordial, social sense. There's a reason why some people joke about the parallels of dating and prostitution. It's just sad that we aren't mature enough, as a society, to be able to further explore what exactly those nuances in gender relations entail. And as for your libertarian/classical liberal views, I wonder how they translate into/a…
/r/MensRights15/06/13 03:49 AM
1

Also: The problem with media-run "conversations" on gender is not merely the almost total absence of male participants, but the suppression of class. Not sure if you missed the part.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 08:11 PM
2

Men have had problems before feminism existed. Men also create/contribute to and perpetuate these problems. Something to keep in mind.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 08:01 PM
0

Not really. There are different definitions of the MRM. For example, if you're a humanist above all, then your view of the MRM wouldn't conflict with a view of feminism (both being about fighting for rights/critiquing harmful gender roles in society). So yea....
/r/MensRights14/06/13 08:00 PM
1

In my (re)interpretation of Marx's argument on the alienation of labor, men's biological/social value as a gender is reduced to what they can do do (their 'labor'), which is then reduced to an economic view (capitalism), which is then broadcast onto society as a whole (social labor). It's like he took end product of the following process: in society, men are viewed as 'valuable' to the degree that they contribute to it via their labor > that labor must, by definition, add value (that is to say, …
/r/MensRights14/06/13 07:59 PM
1

While I disagree with the sexist part of the policy, I think this might be a case of 'we ruined it for ourselves'. They should have applied an equal standard across the board, though.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 04:14 PM
6

Yea, lets judge a man based on his looks. Not like we hate that when society/women do this to us. /s Yea no, his looks has nothing to do with whether or not his policies are right/wrong, so shouldn't we just not go there? =\
/r/MensRights14/06/13 04:13 PM
2

I believe that when it comes to abortion itself, the decision should rest 100% with the woman because of the sovereignty of her body. That, however, is a question different from the issue of being a parent: women have the option of adoption or safe-havens (depending on where they live), so they can, in effect, opt-out of being a parent even IF they give birth. Men need to have the same right.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 06:04 AM
-7

To be fair, we have a far less chance of experiencing sexual assault then they do. That is, until we go to prison. Anyways, maybe they ought to change that to 'advice on how not to be assaulted/robbed'?
/r/MensRights14/06/13 06:02 AM
3

That's a rule for people in general. What they do is always what they really mean.
/r/MensRights14/06/13 05:59 AM
7

The idea is not that this is wrong because it's meant literally but rather that it's wrong because it normalizes the idea of violence against men (or put broadly: violence is the 'natural' domain of men) THROUGH humor. For example: slapstick comedy....which gender is predominantly featured in this?
/r/MensRights14/06/13 05:51 AM
1

That and, you know, it's generally a shitty thing to do. But hey! Vitriol is only bad when feminists do it, AMIRITE!?
/r/MensRights04/06/13 04:09 PM
2

You've never been exposed to a emotionally-toxic relationship, have you? Nothing ever seems the way it actually is. Up is down and down is up; you're lost in a malaise of confusing, and more importantly, TOXIC emotions, nearing that of an addiction. It's not a choice, imo. It's almost a neurosis.
/r/MensRights31/05/13 01:03 PM
41

I love it when people totally ignore/try to erase the sociological causes for most of these phenomena. No, it's not society and the way it sees men as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. It's not society, women and men too, that push men, as a whole, to see their worth based on how much economic value they can command. No, it's not our culture that teaches men that they're only valued when they're doing something for someone else (and thus they get lost in their search for ever-incr…
/r/MensRights31/05/13 12:59 PM
0

Can confirm this. It's awesome when a girl can push some weight.
/r/TheRedPill20/05/13 09:16 PM
1

Unless you're being attacked or the person is making threatening gestures (or just plain threatening you), then you don't have a right to attack them. You can't assault someone for being a douche. And to clarify, I was on her side up until that point because clearly he was acting like a douche when he tried to cut in front of her. No one knows what people go through in life so why they feel they can do just do disrespectful shit, out of the blue, is beyond me. But should she have maced him? Hell…
/r/MensRights26/01/13 06:21 AM
-9

Umad? got no rebuttal it seems.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 02:33 AM
12

Disproportionate force is NOT self defense.
/r/MensRights18/01/13 01:59 AM
1

You don't progress by tearing others down, but rather by lifting everyone else up to a higher level. Just my 2 cents worth. :P Cheers. Oh and holding everyone accountable for their own shit. Crucial.
/r/MensRights05/01/13 12:16 AM
1

More importantly, the issue NEVER is as basic as it seems. As someone who's studied anti-oppression ideologies in university, such as feminism, socialism, anti-racism, etc, I've often seen these very same ideologies attack and/or deny the validity of those that ought to be there in solidarity with them. For example, look at the schism in feminism between black feminists and the rest: their critique of popular feminism is the way it A) distorts the view on gender by taking a particularity (ie one…
/r/MensRights03/01/13 10:26 PM
3

Your rhetoric is over the top. That is the sole reason why I say what i'm saying. You sound like a feminist. You made a universal negative as a claim and then expect OTHERS to prove you wrong? Sorry but that's not how it works.
/r/MensRights25/12/12 11:16 PM
2

But no one wants to support men who seem threatening, even if those men are innocent and are getting abused. That's just reality. Take it from a large black man, this is the truth. We can't communicate if no one cares to listen, can we?
/r/MensRights25/12/12 06:08 AM
1

Dunno..lol?
/r/MensRights25/12/12 06:07 AM
1

Saying that 'Men invented everything' is just flat-out wrong. It's also vitriolic and an ideology fueled by bitterness rather than empirical evidence. So....
/r/MensRights25/12/12 06:06 AM
1

Of course no offense. Sorry but you're too far-gone to have a reasonable discussion with. Your vitriol is not needed.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 05:43 AM
1

There's no logic to that, I agree, but that doesn't mean that others would feel there's a connection. Again, the aim is equality, and vitriolic language does nothing but cloud the issues at hand.
/r/MensRights24/12/12 05:28 AM
1

Doesn't make it any better..
/r/MensRights24/12/12 05:25 AM
0

Yep..
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:36 PM
1

Yup. I second this. There's no need to resort to adopting the same mentality that this subreddit's trying to fight against. Just because it's a man doing it, doesn't make it any less bad as when a woman does it. Isn't that the point of all of this?
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:35 PM
0

Agreed.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:34 PM
-10

It could be argued that this system is in place because women were excluded from the work-force for so long. I think it's important to not resort to such knee-jerking, unidirectional thinking because in doing so, you miss the forest for the trees.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:34 PM
7

Yea no, not helping. We don't know much about the story and TMZ is is an extremely bad 'source' of information.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:32 PM
18

Actually, you're spot-on. Part of what made me start to look at this movement were the parallels in the ideas. Oppression is omnidirectional: it can happen to anyone from ANY angle. So using this type of language is actually fitting. That said, we should probably wait until more info is out on the situation. We don't know what happened between the two behind closed doors...
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:31 PM
1

I see. So you are not for making subsections, but are for making race a bigger part of the MRM. Sort of. I've already encountered "MRA"-type ideas in anti-racist studies anyways (I'm a black male...so of course problems addressing race WILL cover the gender spectrum as well). So it's not really anything different, it's sort of the natural progression of these things. Cross-referential analyses are important for highlighting how the same event looks different ways depending on the perspective. I …
/r/MensRights23/12/12 08:07 PM
1

Alliances, more or less. The idea is egalitarianism, no? Then we ought to share our stories/perspectives with one another, I think.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 06:29 AM
1

Okay. Take the whole "false-rape" thing...and then look at how, back in the 'day', black males got lynched for even being accused of going near white women. Well, that's a gender issue AMPLIFIED by race, or put differently, it was a racial issue that took on gendered form. Either way, they interwoven into each other that separating them took away from a proper analysis of the situation. And that's but ONE example. There are many. Any analysis that doesn't look at all angles to see the nuanced wa…
/r/MensRights23/12/12 06:01 AM
1

Except when race affects the degree to which sexism happens (ie the intensity, or alters the end result). But hey, not like that's important... Yea, you sound like feminists that try to 'address' issues men have by simply blaming it all on patriarchy. "Why make the distinction" they say...we NEED cross-referential analyses, because they help us understand these social phenomena better.
/r/MensRights23/12/12 05:48 AM
2

It's not a competition. It's about facts and truth. I've seen it all over here where people say "Men have it worse in X area(s)". Is that not an incitement to 'competition' by your same standards? What this person is saying is that we have to have an open discussion that looks at ALL angles, or we'll never get this humanist-egalitarian job done right.
/r/MensRights22/12/12 03:33 AM
4

Well, isn't part of the 'mrm' pointing out areas of society where men are disproportionately affected? So I don't see how it's 'splitting' to point out other disproportionate parts. That and it also builds solidarity to be like "I see how an issue that affects our group, is also expressed in yours). But what do I know..i'm just a black male tryna make sense of this all...
/r/MensRights22/12/12 03:29 AM
2

Sigh You aren't getting it.
/r/MensRights14/12/12 01:30 AM
1

You can rationalize anything around one big boogie-man if you wanted to, but it doesn't work if you're trying to be fair and balanced. Your analysis is clearly off the mark. WAY off.
/r/MensRights13/12/12 07:18 PM
1

Not really.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 12:18 AM
1

Exactly. What is this person on? Who would want to marry a child (or be treated like one in a marriage, either)? Equality is the beginning of respect (and maturity, for that matter).
/r/MensRights29/11/12 12:18 AM
1

Agreed. Horrible article and it seemingly only does harm to the discussion.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 12:17 AM
1

Exactly. No excuse for being an asshole.
/r/MensRights29/11/12 12:14 AM
1

Good point.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 11:59 PM
2

Good point.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 11:59 PM
0

When we quit identifying women as perpetual victims and men as perpetual rape-machines then we can get to work unraveling why people are so shitty. Exactly. The problem isn't the stats that show that one side or the other side is 'more' of a victim (or perpetrator). The problem is using such data to label the ENTIRE GROUP as being as such. When these types of assumptions become the foundations for your theories, and furthermore go unquestioned, you develop reactionary theories that replicate the…
/r/MensRights28/11/12 11:55 PM
1

You have a point in that the vitriol in this gender debate is contributing to a lack of empathy for female victims of sexual assault, but it works both ways. You can't criticize one side for lacking empathy, and then go on to do the exact same thing. It's disingenuous and it shows that you're more worried about power than actual issues of social justice.
/r/MensRights28/11/12 11:53 PM
5

I was told that it's whining to complain about legitimate issues. Well, that is, that they don't seem legitimate from the point of view of a female. Shrug Don't understand how women can expect men to care about issues that affect women only, and at the same time, turn around and tell men to stop 'whining' about male issues that they don't take seriously because they aren't men. They want inequality because they want us to walk a mile in their shoes, but they don't want to step one foot in ours. …
/r/MensRights26/11/12 01:16 AM
1

It's because we're incensed that we're unable to understand their perspective. The same is true for them and at some point, maturity has to set in. Someone HAS to cross the isle....and if not us, then who? Because they aren't.
/r/MensRights13/11/12 07:22 PM
8

Source?
/r/MensRights11/11/12 05:49 PM
1

You're right, but that's not the question we should be asking ourselves. What we really should be asking is this: "What are the intrinsic values contained in feminism that make it a convincing view point for the people who adhere to it, how do we match those values to ours, and how do we communicate a shared understanding so that we can move forward on these matters?"
/r/MensRights11/11/12 12:41 PM
1

And feminists think this way about MRA's too. Keep making their mistake. This is to say that while inside that way of thinking, "right and wrong" is shaped by the lens that used to examine the same situation. Both "MRAs", "Feminists", and "Egalitarianists" view the same situation with different lenses, and chances are that it's the last position that has the most 'complete' view of the situation (ie, a 'feminist' version of a gender egalitarian is an 'equity feminist').
/r/MensRights08/11/12 04:32 PM
1

Basically, and the same is equally true for us. This is why egalitarianism is the only mature way forward, I think.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 10:54 PM
1

Agency vs moral culpability. The two don't interact: your responsibility to conduct your affairs in a sensible manner does not detract from the moral responsibility (fault) of the person who committed the crime in the first place. The former is not victim blaming, but without the latter, it DOES become abusive. If you use agency to try and detract from moral culpability, you lose your human ability to empathize. At the same time, however, the problem with this "i was drunk, willfully engaged in …
/r/MensRights05/11/12 10:52 PM
4

So basically our in-group/out-group thinking is preventing us from seeing each other's points of view. Gotcha. Need more humility and understanding.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 10:47 PM
3

But it is, though. Can you imagine the social pressure that would come down on a man's head if he didn't do this in a group full of women? This isn't necessarily universally true, but it's at least partially true some of the time, and this is a problem. It's similar to the whole "make me a sandwich" thing for women. These are just general life skills that are necessary for EVERYONE. Men shouldn't be singled out (though again, it is a man-targeted website).
/r/MensRights05/11/12 10:44 PM
2

And i suppose the idea is that women aren't supposed to do any of these things when they're in trouble...just men? Is that what you're pointing at? I'm not sure how much this is a function of the target demographic than it is the idea of forcing these things onto men and only men.
/r/MensRights05/11/12 10:42 PM
4

Being stuck paying for a child that isn't yours because you dared to be kind to em is one of the most egregious things I've ever come across in North American society. It's one-sided extraction. Cuckoldry (or in this sense, out-sourced cuckoldry) is to men what rape is to women (not in actuality but in terms of describing what a "one-sided gendered extraction" phenomenon would look like for the two genders). It's taking without giving back; it's breaking the social contract on gender, sex, and c…
/r/MensRights05/11/12 08:18 PM
1

Look to see if the light's green. if it isn't, find creative ways to incentive it (entire) to being that way. Within reason and classiness of course.
/r/seduction26/10/12 09:00 PM
3

What the guy did was pretty shitty. At the same time, however, I think this reflects something: women need to start waking the fuck up to the fact that they've got agency and power now, and that means also violence. They need to figure out how not to abuse it, like men are consistently taught (to the point of pathology) in society. This entire thing is the epitome of that: women can flash, show anything they want in society, except for maybe exaggerated examples where they take things too far, a…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:32 PM
2

You could if your feelings were important...but they're not.
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:29 PM
3

Exactly. It almost feels as though society is doing a 180 and reversing the direction of 'social oppression' (with the assumption being that such oppression is unidirectional....ie 'patriarchy theory'). As society comes to bear the brunt of the force of women's natural power plus their newly formed political, economic, and social power (well, more like 'overt' forms of power they already had in indirect form, but anyway), women are being forced to come to grips with the responsibility of said po…
/r/MensRights26/10/12 08:08 PM
2

Why is this even legal?
/r/MensRights22/10/12 02:29 AM
3

TIL: 'Sufficiently scared' is enough to get resources spent on the awareness of a 'threat'. This just in: UFOs!!!! AAHH.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 02:26 AM
6

Female Selection. Wait, what was all that I heard about "Male as 'universal, female as 'other'", Patriarchy Theory, etc etc. IF women are selecting (objectifies men, and also implies they aren't adult enough to 'select', or are 'less than' if they don't get 'selected'), then what happens to these social-gender narratives? Oops...guess they forgot to put on their rationalization caps before submitting their work. :P
/r/MensRights22/10/12 02:25 AM
3

Yea...no. Edit: I'm gonna have to weigh in negatively on this one. First of all, the slut-shaming thing isn't going to win us many friends, and it's certainly not going to help us keep allies. Would we like it if women engaged in male-shaming? of course not. So why reciprocate instead of take the higher road. Second, Fluke's point was that contraceptives for women (ie birth control) CAN be a part of health treatment (which is true), and thus to say you can't have it on Obamacare is wrong. I agre…
/r/MensRights22/10/12 12:31 AM
3

I can concede that. The problem isn't "Western Civilization" per-say, but rather the fact OF chattel slavery (or any similar variant with a different name), so it doesn't matter if it's exclusive.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 12:24 AM
1

Because you're not stooping to their level? Because responding that way only reinforces the same gender-antagonisms that create this subreddit in the first place? Because women are people do and we can't survive without them? I dunno. Because you're a decent-fucking-human-being? I'm never going to drop my expectations of women because they're the expectations you'd have of any healthy adult human being in the 21st century.
/r/MensRights22/10/12 12:21 AM
1

Everyone has power, to a degree. So much as human beings need each other, power within society will remain relational. Often times, however, two competing powers within society class over the same issue, each side often having several good merits to their arguments. This is one such example. In the same breath that the person in the example comment pointed to the power of black women, as well as the negative effects that this power has had on the black community, they wash away (read: absolve) t…
/r/MensRights22/10/12 12:17 AM
1

Basically: it's the threat of male power (in this sense, overt power turned into sexual aggression) being turned in on itself. It's analogous to slut-shaming in a more traditionalist view: don't misuse the power society says your gender has (framed within a social context of 'right and wrong, of course).
/r/MensRights22/10/12 12:05 AM
1

I'm black.... That's right, shut up. (ironically, this is what' 'anti-oppression politics' has come to these days and what motives my initial reply in the first place)
/r/MensRights21/10/12 11:56 PM
1

Contrast this with, say, the Treyvon Martin case...and then see what's missing in your analysis of how the low is applied in our society. (hint: its gender)
/r/MensRights21/10/12 11:55 PM
7

Put another way: the thing that makes her unable to give consent renders him unable to know consent was given. But wait, it doesn't matter what men are under the influence of...they're always guilty of the consequences of their poor decisions.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:03 AM
7

The amount of mental gymnastics necessary in order to perform a feat like this..is astounding. In the same breath that they render all intoxicated women incapable of giving consent, they, in-turn, they inflate male agency to hyperbolic proportions. Consent and responsibility are two sides of the same coin...so what this poster is trying to do is, in effect, change the definition of rape (in this context) to be unidirectional, when it is not.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 04:00 AM
1

Disgusting. I would never find value in a book that tries to teach the reader how to reduce their partner into a mindless slave.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 03:57 AM
1

And. Begs. To. Do. More. Fucking creepy; they want slaves, not people. emotional eunuchs, not equal partners.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 03:55 AM
1

I would argue that women experience discrimination when it comes to positions where 'agency' is a central feature (such as politics), in the same way that men experience discrimination when it comes to positions where 'trust' is a central feature (such as the childcare industry). So yea, it does exist I think. I just think it's better explained by the gender division of labour we see in the market.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 03:50 AM
1

no idea why you're being downvoted. your responses have been both insightful and on point.
/r/MensRights21/10/12 03:43 AM
7

Funny thing is...I have no problem with people being like this. It'll be like a new religion...or whatever. A new 'way of life'. Good for them. What I have a problem with, however, is them wanting everyone else to live like they do too. We ALL need to be free and their society is frighteningly not. They're gunning to be the new oppressors...fuck equality, eh?
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:55 PM
0

Fucking Poe. You're the King of it. Edit: You're getting a tag/title named "The master of feminist poe." F*ck Yea, you oughtta go out now and celebrate.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:50 PM
2

And they have no shame at all, because they rationalize it off as "They're adults and it's their choice". But they know this is hogwash because of the very thing they're utilizing to manipulate these men with in the first place: their sexuality. They forever deny it to them so that they can forever receive from them, and then turn around two-faced and act like they're not using some kind of coercive force in this situation (typical hypo-agency). It's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:49 PM
1

agreed. it's like misinformation.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 03:46 PM
-1

agreed. if we, as a society, are to mature at a healthy rate, we need to stop being closed to discussing ideas on a social-wide scale. We ALL need to chip in to contributing our piece of the puzzle so that we can form a solution that includes a bit of what everyone wants. This is basically what Mill said in "Liberty". It's through the continual scrutiny of the ideas we hold, increasingly holding our beliefs to a higher standard, that we move towards 'truth' because they will be distilled to thei…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 02:57 PM
2

This is similar to a phenomenon we see regarding race, where often we'll find that racial minorities (not the celebrity spokespeople that attempt to speak for them) aren't taken seriously when they speak about their own issues to others (such as the war on drugs and it's disproportionate affect on racial bodies...and men), but when someone more considered part of the 'norm' (re: access to social power) speaks about these issues, society listens to them (i'll preface this by saying that this less…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:46 AM
-2

Yes and no. Yes in the sense that maturity means taking responsibility for our decisions in the long run. But no in the sense that part of the 'red pill' is the change in our view of society, namely that we become aware of the myriad ways in which men are made the tools of society on it's road to achieve it's own desires. Men are ground up for other people's dreams. We're cannon fodder; nothing more than tools. This is 'male disposability'. "Hypo-agency" is just yet another iteration of this. If…
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:31 AM
11

Or woman up.... No need to assume that women can't put on their adult pants when it comes to emotional responsibility.
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:26 AM
-1

“I can’t stand the kind of paralysis that some people fall into because they’re not happy with the choices they’ve made. You live in a time when there are endless choices. … Money certainly helps, and having that kind of financial privilege goes a long way, but you don’t even have to have money for it. But you have to work on yourself. … Do something!” In this instance, she's a woman after my own heart. It's not enough to simply say "i am a victim of x", you have to look at it holistically, and …
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:23 AM
1

Not...sure....yet. Still thinking about all of this mess, sort of re-examining old issues under new lenses, ya know?
/r/MensRights19/10/12 04:19 AM
7

It's frightening when you it into perspective.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 05:34 PM
2

Black male here. I upvote them both. there's a difference between pride and irrational fear/bigotry/intolerance. Sexism (which is an MRA issue) and racism stem from the same ideological seeds, so I don't see why anyone here would make that kind of mistake.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 03:57 PM
1

I'm agreeing with you. I worded my response awkwardly that's all.
/r/MensRights18/10/12 01:59 AM
20

Because society as a whole won't vote women in. Wait oops, women = the majority, so the lack of support for female politicians is a part of what women desire (ie they speak with their votes). And chances are that this isn't indoctrination but free-choice, since most women are educated these days. You can't say they're ignorant of their rights and are powerless in north american society. It's not like how it is in Afghanistan. Plus, if there are men who want to help women too, they'd vote female …
/r/MensRights17/10/12 06:31 PM
-2

And hence the idea of the 'final solution to the problem of men'. Racism and feminism....what? They're the fucking same?
/r/MensRights17/10/12 06:25 PM
5

Yup. Saying that it's not instated now is a strawman: the point is that if it's needed, it WILL be. And it WILL be unequal. Guaranteed.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:34 PM
7

It points to the sacrifice and loss that soldiers (primarily men in those days) endured in order to get the freedoms that feminists so casually abuse, such as freedom of speech, working (a right for women vs a responsibility for men), etc. So yea, it's damn well relevant. Every time someone shouts "patriarchy", you throw this image in their face. Life back then was shitty for everyone, yet somehow it was only hard for women? Yea, right. We're evolving as a species and these kinds of images help …
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:33 PM
14

You can't be shipped off unless you're signed up. So yes, it's fucking the same thing. It's like a gun; just because the gun isn't actually shooting right now doesn't make it any less of a threat.
/r/MensRights17/10/12 01:31 PM
1

Except when a woman lies about being on birthcontrol......? Just turn the situation around: some of the most absurd examples are all that's enough to make people stop their man-hate (or find a different way to express it).
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:56 PM
1

in order for men to be seen as valuable, they have to OUTPERFORM women in many important functions in the societal sphere. Pulled the thought right out of my head.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:54 PM
2

Because he got doxxed because he's a man. http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/11kdh5/gawker_privacy_and_why_you_should_delete_your/ Support the MRA, get doxxed. Moderate a subreddit that you created (1 out of 500) so that it stays "clean", and get doxxed for violating women's right to privacy...in public. Get it? Whole LIVES get destroyed for simply sympathizing with the MRA, while women have a socially-enforceable right to have privacy in public? It's beyond absurd.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:52 PM
3

lol...arrogant son of a bitch. You could have just said this from the start and avoid this whole exchange in the first place. But hey, you learn everyday. Hope to see something more from you.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:47 PM
2

Bingo. REAL oppression is easily demonstrable by looking at data and facts. First world > Third world, for example. Sometimes it's more difficult to determine (eg: slavery is more overt than jim crow, which is more overt than, say, the war on drugs). But it's ALWAYS identifiable (and thus falsifiable). When you see a theory trying to say that things have ALWAYS been like that and will ALWAYS be like that unless you overturn EVERYTHING, you're looking at a theory trying to achieve the same oppres…
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:44 PM
1

So basically...they're just saying it to make themselves look good and feel better? Didnt see that coming!
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:39 PM
3

Isn't Doxxing the exact OPPOSITE of free speech? The internet is one of the few places where privacy CAN exist if you remain anonymous. By doc dropping someone, you expose them to repercussions in real life for expressing their views online (note: i'm keeping this post strictly to the subject, as it relates to the ability to express one's viewpoint freely). This is, by definition, curtailing free-speech. And punishing those who would try to do so by 'banning' their sites from this one (which doe…
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:37 PM
2

yup.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:34 PM
4

You're replying with pictures rather than cogent argument. You haven't shown an ounce of engagement or growth in this thread on the topic at hand. So yea...you lack discipline!
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:32 PM
2

except that she stabbed them. If this was a teen male from, say, the inner-city, being caught up in petty street violence, he would be tried as an adult. So your analogy breaks down there as well. Don't get me wrong, it's a reasonable response, but it's incidentally reasonable. The motives driving this entire story might include that reasonable dynamic, but that dynamic doesn't explain why that situation happened. The motives/social norms do.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:28 PM
2

All that BLOOD was an attempt to harm her emotional state of well being. That misogynist bleed like a stuck pig on purpose! /s God, this shit is so insane, it's scary.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:25 PM
0

Yea, this broke down for me the moment I realize that it was 'essentialism' with a biblical flavor. There's no more evidence that women, as a gender, are genetically programmed to be discontent, anymore than there's evidence that men, as a gender, are programmed to be Schrodinger rapist. We're human beings and we have drives, hungers, desires, instincts, etc. We have free choice. An analogy that tries to hide away the sophistication of reality (uncertainty) with an illusion (certainty), is not a…
/r/MensRights16/10/12 03:21 PM
1

One man's comedy is another man's tragedy. They're laughing at their own misfortune. A sad creature this is, Schrodinger Rapist.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:31 PM
1

time = money = labour = you = disposable = their profit
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:29 PM
1

win
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:25 PM
2

See, shit like this pisses me off because I wrote about it in university. The problem with batshit scales like this is that it assumes all the units are the same. They are NOT. Each category of difference doesn't add and take from a collective 'pool' of privilege/oppression. Each category contains within it, it's own set of logic, experiences, and social effects. They are not the same at all. You can't just add them up together. It's not arithmetic. You have to examine each category to find info…
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:23 PM
14

holy shit, it's like a female version of patriarchy....it's like they're not trying to remove the dynamic that creates gender inequalities in society. They're just trying to make it change hands.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:13 PM
3

A false rape accusation leaves a social tarnish. in the above example, it was clear she wasn't guilty of the accusation...but the tarnish remained.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:12 PM
1

Projection.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:11 PM
3

Facebook is to MRA's what skin is to black people: it's a socially visible marker of difference. You post shit to your fb profile and people connect the dots and link you back to your online identity, and then suddenly people start distancing themselves from you. Not because you've done anything wrong or changed, but solely because of a bad social obligation (ie the stigma of 'male rights'). It's bogus.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:09 PM
4

...because? Am I the only one still waiting for this guy to give an argument for why his opinion ought to convince us of anything? Rational-Skepticism indeed.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:07 PM
2

This. So fucking worrisome.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:03 PM
2

word. they argue like creationists.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 02:02 PM
37

Nailed it. This is why this is an MRA problem.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 01:55 PM
1

Yup. There's a reason why the villain is called the "bad guy."
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:38 AM
2

So between each punch..you can't attack? Not sure you've got this thing right, bro.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:32 AM
2

It's one thing to yell. It's another thing to escalate the situation into a physical confrontation. She bears the brunt of the responsibility because she's the one who instigated violence. Yes, the uppercut was totally inappropriate, but it wouldn't have even happened had she not assaulted him first. It's amazing how little consideration you're giving the guy and how much you're given the girl.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:23 AM
2

Your 'right' to defend yourself should not be predicated on how strong you are. Rights are universal.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:21 AM
2

Yea i was with you on the self-defense point until you changed the goalposts. If she keeps attacking, then it's self-defense. Uppercut IS disproportionate, but the problem is that men are held to a higher standard where this is concerned, meaning they have a lot less leeway when it comes to defending themselves. This is wrong and unfair.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:20 AM
2

And I agree with you on the self-defense point. But the fact remains is that men are held responsible for this a lot more than women are. So there STILL is a problem.
/r/MensRights16/10/12 12:18 AM
1

snicker Little moments like these make this worthwhile.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:28 PM
1

Tell me again why it's okay when we do this but not when they do it?
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:26 PM
3

Interesting analogy.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:20 PM
1

No. What makes it rape is that you said NO and the person didn't listen.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:19 PM
2

Nailed it. She was raped. If she had to be 'fighting the guy off', then it's fucking rape. Simple as.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:18 PM
2

I agree and disagree. I agree with the idea that it's ludicrous to think that women can consent to sex while drunk WHEN they actually want it, but when it's 'unwanted' (the meaning of which is variable), then it's rape, even if the person didn't say no. This is basic cherry-picking. But I wholeheartedly disagree with you on the second example. That guy basically forced himself on her via coercion (psychological). Yea, sure she could have left, but that doesn't change the fact that he kept trying…
/r/MensRights15/10/12 11:14 PM
1

Just like creationists, actually.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 09:00 PM
-1

Shit like this turns me off from here. F'real.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 09:00 PM
6

Atheism+, not 'atheism' as a position on the question of whether or not God exists.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:58 PM
3

So much for rational skepticism.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:57 PM
1

Ahh, I see what you mean now.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 08:55 PM
0

In Toronto? Maybe. In Montreal? Winnipeg? Edmonton? Calgary? Heh, no. Not even close. Canada has got a long way to go when it comes to issues of race where all parties involved are concerned.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:39 PM
5

Wow. Black male here, and reading that blew my mind. Never considered this possible until now. Gonna think on it. Thanks. Edit: okay, after thinking about it a bit, it seems like issues that would be addressed by "white rights", at least in terms of economics, could be fought under the heading of "socialist". Hence white liberals: anti-racist, pro-worker. As for things outside of economics, you have different areas. Religion, feminism even serves as one. So it seems like the NEEDS have been (or …
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:34 PM
2

She was for me. Saved my ass.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 04:07 PM
1

You error in attributing to human nature what gets played out in the racial theater. People will keep investing reasons, but that doesn't mean that those reasons actually make sense. Furthermore, it was not just a matter of 'oppression': the intensity, aim, method of utilization, and overall quality of experience was fundamentally different.
/r/MensRights15/10/12 06:21 AM
1

Such images make me shudder. It's like we haven't learned from our mistakes a species. More abject violence coming right up!
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:29 AM
1

Disagree. Though the two often correlate, it's not rarity that sets the social acceptance of violence. It's the ideas within society itself that does this.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:27 AM
1

They felt uncomfortable that she used the "n-word" towards the driver....but not uncomfortable that she assaulted him? The problem with the driver was that his response was disproportionate. He shouldn't have uppercut her. Heck, I don't think it was even smart to try to hit her back, maybe restrain her, but lets be real: people are people. You hit them, they're gonna get angry, they're not going to think straight, and thus do dumb things (like uppercut someone). At least that's the way I see it.…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:24 AM
1

@ 0:43 seconds in.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:17 AM
1

Because the rise of poverty is due to a number of factors, many of which are economic. But then again, your statement isn't exactly well-defined (ie articulated points/examples) either, so it's difficult to provide 'reasoning and proof' to rebut something like that. My response was a reflection of this fact.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:15 AM
2

Bingo. This is the crux of the matter: she would not have done what she did if she could reasonably expect to get an uppercut to the face. Note that this isn't the same as normalized violence against women (such as domestic abuse). This woman assaulted someone, but wasn't EXPECTING the person to defend themselves. Who else would even enjoy such an expectation in society? I know that as a black male I don't. And hell, go back a couple decades, and a black woman couldn't say that she could enjoy s…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:10 AM
2

Not really. Have you done any sort of academic study on native culture in the America's? They warred with each other, but they didn't invent chattel slavery. Chattel slavery was a whole other set of fucked up shit. That and the way that the natives were treated on their own land. it was all bad. We were demonstrating that we were definitely in our infancy when we pulled that shit off. shrug Just my two cents.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:05 AM
2

The problem is not that slavery existed, but that slavery, as experienced in the America's, was fundamentally different than normal slavery. It was chattel slavery: it was systemic, multi-generational, extremely vicious, and it destroyed whole groups of people. it tore up families, and unlike most other forms of slavery, where people become slaves due to debt or being captured as prisoners of war, chattel slaves were born (or kidnapped) into it via the virtue of the color of their own skin. In t…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 10:03 AM
1

You have to take a comprehensive and historical view of the situation. Frankly, the social benefits of being "white" haven't been the same as they were in the Jim-crow era (which wasn't too long ago...since, say, the 70's, after the civil rights)? The biggest amount of "advantage" was economic: from slavery and the dispossession of labor and resources, to Jim-crow, where people weren't being hired, families starved, and whole communities were gutted (ie high-ways were built over them, etc). And …
/r/MensRights14/10/12 09:59 AM
1

I've always found that to be a difficult line to differentiate. On the one hand, there's nothing wrong with conservative views, but on the other I've seen black folks align themselves with ideas and people that are necessarily detrimental to themselves. Sort of like a racial version of "white-knighting" - namely he idea of hating yourself/your own for the sake of gaining allegiance with other folks. I think all races should unite against racism in the same way that I think both sexes should unit…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 09:48 AM
1

That last part is what's telling: no other 'minority' group, as a whole, enjoys such a wide acceptance of power within society. Not blacks, not gays, not immigrants....NOBODY else enjoys the sheer amount of social acceptance that feminism does within our society. I'm all for positive results and growth on the front of women's rights and standards of living (education, and all that), but I'm not for flipping the roles in an oppressive system. It's not good enough to simply switch the "masters": y…
/r/MensRights14/10/12 09:46 AM
1

Well said.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 09:42 AM
1

Agreed. We've got a long way to go, my friend.
/r/MensRights14/10/12 09:42 AM
1

Factually you are correct, but attributing the rise of poverty due to social policies...well, that's where you error.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 09:09 PM
6

Sorry, but i agree with this. If you put your hands on someone (ie punch them in the face), expect to be knocked the fuck out if the person can fight. It's as simple as that. The uppercut was overkill, but yea a punch back to defend yourself from someone assaulting you is more than justified.
/r/MensRights13/10/12 08:38 PM
11

Where exactly did I talk about "being unkind"?
/r/MensRights13/10/12 01:53 AM
3

Natives fought and sold each other as well. Check the Cherokee. It's not about "who's the most innocent", but rather it's about "who got fucked and how can we make it better again?".
/r/MensRights13/10/12 01:52 AM
21

This. I find out of all other markers of "discrimination", class (or money) proves to be the biggest conveyor of advantage compared to any other marker of difference. Race, gender, location of origin, etc. None of it compares to class: if you have the money, you're living good. If you're born into it, you have "privilege" because wealth is a very distinct advantage to have. Whether or not having said wealth is "moral" or not, is another question entirely. But the point is that each of these diff…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 10:02 PM
15

How is "you have the most power" any less of a bigoted-conversation-stopper than "you're inferior"? The rhetoric is immaterial; it's the EFFECT that's of primary concern. Bigotry is wholly a result of such questions, regardless of their content. The solution to these problems isn't "lets look at who has the most power and then give to everyone else", but rather it's "how can we right wrongs and bring things back to a level of sustainable equality?" These are two fundamentally different solutions…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 09:59 PM
1

I hear you, bro. Bro-hug. I don't think that we, as a species, will make if it we can't figure this "equality" shit out. F'real.
/r/MensRights12/10/12 09:57 PM
112

As a black man, I've always felt ashamed at hearing ideas such as this, especially when uttered by fellow racial minorities. The idea that someone cannot have a negative experience, or that experiences they have are invalid simply because they're "part of the dominant" group, is oppressive. It stems from the same ideological roots that all bigotry stems from: the denial of personhood, of freedom, of the ability to write one's own story, all for the purpose of "othering" and "categorizing" a grou…
/r/MensRights12/10/12 09:56 PM
9

Ahh, the old 'shaming people into giving us more stuff' trope.
/r/MensRights05/10/12 06:49 AM
1

Being forced into a sexual situation/context is different than being "offended." Okay: Someone trying to chat you up on the street. That's "offending." Seeing someone trying to initiate some form of sexual encounter of some kind is an assault. So yea, I was thinking of the more serious forms of that, like sexual-harassment.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 09:08 PM
1

You missed the part where that comment also basically said that "it's not bad since it could have been worse". So essentially, unless a man gets killed by these perverse gender narratives, they can't complain because "it could be worse". In other words: stfu unless you;re bleeding from your neck.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 09:06 PM
18

Beautifully written. It's a sad thing when you spend 4 years in a university reading about the "oppression" of many groups of people (racial, religious, political, cultural, ethnic, national, you name it), only to see the EXACT SAME PROSE, LANGUAGE, and CONCEPTS used and yet largely ignored by everyone else. It's like "Everyone can be expressed...except you". Every society needs a "bottom".
/r/MensRights03/10/12 05:15 PM
1

Okay, a couple of things. first being that this would not only be dismissing just about every homosexual or lesbian person out there but also also assuming that men and women simply cannot control themselves around one another(not to mention presuming that all men are attracted to all women and all women are attracted to all men). If there were enough homosexuals around (openly, I mean), then there'd be a large enough group to allow further-subdivision. But they aren't (atm). This brings me to t…
/r/MensRights03/10/12 04:24 PM
9

Trans: Man rules: Do EVERYTHING. Pay, hold door open, protect her from possible lethal collisions from cars on the sidewalk, call her after the date, and get rid of that gut! Clearly this is what REAL men do!
/r/MensRights03/10/12 04:18 PM
-6

That's a non-sequitor. how is the idea that a misconception in the source of violence in intimate partnerships somehow causally related the idea that 'patriarchy theory', as an explanation for the suffering women face in society, is 'bunk'? That just logically does not follow. What makes 'patriarchy theory' incorrect is not the existence of personality disorders. IPV (intimate partner violence) is not systematic, nor is it at the social level. It's at the individual level.
/r/MensRights03/10/12 03:18 PM
1

There's a difference between social differences and biological differences. You're tackling the social (cultural) differences, and really and truly there shouldn't BE a social divide based on a biological difference. Where they SHOULD be a divide, however, is in the biological: it's not because men and women are different, but because they fuck each other and have babies, that they should be divided. It's a socially-enforced biological divide. Going to the washroom is a private fucking thing; it…
/r/MensRights03/10/12 03:09 PM
2

He can tell her what he wants, so long as he doesn't try to force her to do anything she doesn't want to do. Why is this an issue? if he wrote an angry letter, cussing her out for leaving the dishes in the sink last night, who gives a fuck? So he has sexual fantasies and has crazy religious beliefs that make him feel like he has a license to be an asshole about things. Shrug So what?
/r/MensRights03/10/12 02:55 AM
3

2.\ This is highly contested. If consent for a contract would be invalid if intoxication were present, could we say the same for a contract with criminal implications? To prove a contract was invalid due to lack of consent would be a civil matter. Surely, then, the same requirements cannot be held for a criminal matter! Obviously, in my mind, both parties being drunk should not qualify as rape by either. But then the intricacies really only arise when there's nobody else looking. Was he/she blac…
/r/MensRights03/10/12 02:48 AM
4

The 10th said she got shoved on the stairs a couple of times and once no-one gave up their seat for her (she was a perfectly healthy un-pregnant twenty-something) and she seemed pretty indignant about it. ....what? How can able-bodied people expect others to give up their seats for them? What?!
/r/MensRights03/10/12 01:56 AM
0

The ending kind of killed me, lol. At first it was clearly visible that A) women are taught in society how to protect themselves from being victims more than men and B) that men aren't even aware of why this is a problem (NO one should be a victim, so this is knowledge everyone should have for themselves), yet the conclusion THIS GUY came too...was that women are burdened by the benefit of having more knowledge of how to protect themselves than men? As if to say "wow, guys don't have to think ab…
/r/MensRights03/10/12 01:46 AM
7

I wouldn't even mind the fact that we're expected to contribute more than we receive and do more if we were thanked properly for it. I mean, i've gone up to women sometimes (mostly family, some friends) and thanked them for their ability to give birth (it's a vital and necessary ability for human beings as a whole) because I'm genuinely appreciative of what they contribute. It's a noble fucking thing, child birth. But when it comes time for a man to contribute his muscle, or other masculine-asso…
/r/MensRights02/10/12 04:16 PM
-1

Because "fuck men", that's why. This society condones retributive justice against individual men who haven't even wronged anybody for perceived wrongs (real and imagined) against women as a whole.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 04:06 PM
2

Agreed. We can do better.
/r/MensRights02/10/12 03:43 PM
3

Thanks for the source. Sad numbers to see. :(
/r/MensRights01/10/12 11:46 PM
0

Feminists: This is the female version of "patriarchy" (matriarchy). Deal with it. You guys are the villains now, holy fuck I'm so sorry your life's shit right now, OP. I hope you get things together. Unbelievable. Oppression is the worst, the matter WHO is oppressing WHO.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:46 PM
2

Those privileged coalminers!
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:42 PM
2

Exactly. Oppression is multidirectional.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 07:41 PM
0

yes i know what is your point?..... advocating for eqaul rights does not mean pretending men and women have eqaul abbiliy. Since this was the only reason I was participating in this disagreement, then I guess we're squared.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:41 PM
1

I see your point, but at the same time you can't see that lack of a prison sentence as having HUGE consequences, especially for men? Gender oppression happens via many prisms: class, for example, where you see men dying and getting hurt on the job because rich execs cut corners and honest, hard-working, GOOD men die because of fat-cat greed. We also see gender oppression through the prison of race: sure, you miss that sentence, but the person who doesn't gets 8 years of home-schooling on how to …
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:40 PM
2

lol, no.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:36 PM
1

I see. Thanks for the knowledge.
/r/MensRights01/10/12 04:36 PM
1

Therefore, they can't be objectified, so it doesn't matter. FTFY. On the real, though. /r/creepshots is pretty fucking creepy. So is this link. Fuck em both!
/r/MensRights28/09/12 12:07 PM
1

Creepy as fuck. Have you read the comments? Reverse the gender and you'd have grade-A voyeurism, hands down.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 12:03 PM
5

No, this is not nice. It's COMMON KNOWLEDGE that both men and women get assaulted. How fucked up are things if we view the admittance of a simple truth "nice". What in the actual fuck?
/r/MensRights28/09/12 12:01 PM
1

They basically found that it was a question of values and assigned roles. Assigned roles dolled out a degree of certitude that gave structure and order to the couple's lives, which easily could serve as a "booster-shot", warding off unnecessary arguments. The first point is more telling, however: men who do more work around the house, do so because their values are chasing. And they choose women with similar values, and it is THESE values that lead to higher divorce rates (values that, say, don'…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:57 AM
18

I still can't see the problem with this poster. Saying that men are rapists by choice opens the door to saying that without a conscious choice made, the man isn't a "rapist". Doesn't this open the door to the acceptance that false accusations CAN and DO happen and that we should investigate all the facts of the matter?
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:52 AM
5

Muslims do. No, scratch that: Sharia-law practicing muslim countries do. But yea, it's not the norm in the least.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:50 AM
5

Children need support, dontcha know, and one man's wallet is as good as any. I don't understand why they don't just start grabbing men off of the street and forcing them to father children that aren't theirs...it'd be a lot faster. Skip all the fancy mating rituals.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:48 AM
2

In other words: it's because the OP was a man. And thus oppression comes around full-circle.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:47 AM
1

"Ability" has never been the basis on how society has legally dolled out rights, so.... And again, i categorically reject this kind of thinking. It's this type of thinking that invaded the feminist movement and changed it from being about female rights and equality to the chauvinistic pos it is to day. Once you introduce the idea of "inequality" and thus "justified differing outcomes for people of equal personhood", then you bring back all the shit that we've been fighting again for so long (rac…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:42 AM
1

lol. I'm a gender egalitarian. Nice try, though.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:42 AM
1

The kinds of men that demonize stay at home motherhood (or parenthood for that matter) are the same kinds of men that demonize women for femininity (simply being a woman). Glad I can say i'm not one of those men. But yes, I agree with you.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:41 AM
1

This is exactly what I was thinking, but we don't know.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:38 AM
2

It's not even about reduced sentencing. Self-defense is a well enough defense, but you're not allowed to KILL someone if they punch you. There's a difference between self-defense and excessive use of force. Was the guy chasing her or not? Could she have gotten away? Did she call the police? (Apparently not until after she stabbed him, and then tried to down-play the wound, at that. Doesn't seem like she felt like she was in much danger then. Why would she get close to him all of a sudden if he w…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:37 AM
2

The jury of nine women and three men heard that a kitchen knife entered Mr Zartarian's chest, causing a 15-millimetre stab wound, which damaged a ventricle in his heart. Ms Kasparian then locked herself in the laundry while Mr Zartarian walked around the house making phone calls. When he called out that he was having trouble breathing, Ms Kasparian said she left the laundry and phoned triple-0. The jury was played a recording of the call. "He's fine, it's just a small stab wound," Ms Kasparian s…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:28 AM
11

Well, don'tcha know? Men have ALL the rights. Duh! That's why mens-rights makes feminist angry: we've been hoarding them like gold chips!
/r/MensRights28/09/12 11:24 AM
1

Make the genders neutral, and then change it to self-defense, and you'll get the intended meaning. Him doing what he needs to do in order to protect his rights as a parent is FORCED because of the mother's actions. That is harms her child is a consequence of her posturing towards the father. Simple as. SHE bears the burden of responsibility here. The guy isn't the victim in this, and neither is the child. Nope.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:15 AM
1

Disagree wholeheartedly. I'm the product of that kind of shit (hint: it doesn't turn out too well), so I'm not buying it.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:14 AM
1

"He's not doing it to get back at her, he's doing it to get back at her. See the difference?!?!" If you punch me, and I punch you back in self-defense, then it's your fault that I punched you. He's going through these things for one reason: to have access to his daughter. Do you think that he'd withhold money if he didn't think that that's all his ex wants from him? Do you think he'd do that if he thought for a single second that it wouldn't be a question for him to see his daughter when and whe…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:13 AM
1

Until fathers start winning custody in court after divorce because they're being forced to take part in children's upbringing, by sheer virtue of what you've said. Yea, when that happens, the whole dynamic will be reversed: women will be the new "men". Wonder what they're gonna say when they catch themselves. ("Well, that escalated quickly")
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:06 AM
3

Sounds like a religion to me. It's not about facts, it's about feelings/beliefs. It's bizarre.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 03:03 AM
3

Because men are the badguys and women aren't. if a woman 'divorces', it's because her husband wasn't doing enough and she deserves better. If a man divorces, he's doing it to run from his responsibilities! He needs to 'man-up' and deal with it/stop being a dick. Yup, this is the social narrative that informs these people's minds, so that's why you can have such a blatantly hypocritical sentence and not have anyone flinch at it at all. The thing that scares me is that this is exactly what they've…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:59 AM
3

Men have been fucking each other up since the dawn of time. Doesn't make it right when a man does it, though. In the same way that West-Africans sold their fellow Africans (well, it was more like prisons of war, and by then "race" as a concept wasn't even in existence, so they didn't really feel very buddy-buddy, but you get my point) into slavery. It's not uncommon to find people betraying their own kind.
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:08 AM
8

I was taken aback. She had taken a year's leave from her work for a major bank, a stressful job I knew she didn't miss in the slightest. I was providing everything; in fact I'd quit my job as the head of a design agency to work freelance so that I could be at home to care for both of them. I was already successful; we lacked nothing. It's when you see the depths of the quote mining he does, such as: This guy does nothing. His wife is on non-stop baby duty all day long... child care can be reward…
/r/MensRights28/09/12 02:04 AM
2

No, but I demonize men who would pursue the desire to fuck other women over, say, their chosen commitments (monogamy). But the problem with these "nature" arguments is that not everything is natural. Jealousy and hatred are both "natural" things, yet they're very corrosive to healthy relationships. Being natural doesn't make it great in the least.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 08:28 PM
3

So again, how does this change the "dude mad at lady, punish baby to get back it her" scenario? He's not doing it to get back at her, he's doing it as a consequence of her shitty behaviour. If her charm misses out because of it, it's HER fault because she's responsible for the mess. That's what it means to have responsibility: she should have chosen a better course of action to avoid this/make sure her child has the best care possible. Don't you think that if she actually made sure to keep the f…
/r/MensRights27/09/12 07:50 PM
4

Equality of personhood. In other words: humanism.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 07:15 PM
3

Yea, i stopped reading it seriously when I got to the part where they said "women are inferior to men". #NotInMyHouse Bullshit narratives like this that feminist use to attack men ('men are inferior to women'), or traditionalists use to enslave men ('women are inferior to men, therefore men have a duty to labor for women').
/r/MensRights27/09/12 07:15 PM
5

Yup. Male slaves are useful for their labour, but don't forget about the sex trade: little girls and boys, sold off, and women in general. It's fucked up.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 06:58 PM
1

I demonize this in men to the degree that I demonize cuckoldry in women. We've evolved past that shit now.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 06:56 PM
4

It's not that the kid doesn't deserve support, but SHE doesn't deserve support. This is just one out of a long series of harmful affects that her decision to unilaterally have the child and effectively keep the child away from him, has caused. Had she involved him in the child's life, or had an abortion, or had taken on the responsibility of BEING a single parent (again, HER choice), then she wouldn't be in a finnacial crisis. Seriously, think about it: she had the option to abort, but didn't. S…
/r/MensRights27/09/12 06:53 PM
2

There are men that act like women are their property, alright. You've got the kind that do it in movies....err wait, okay, you've got men who do that IRL, though we call them abusive pieces of shit.....er umm okay, yea not sure I even know of a single guy who views women as his "property". /s It's obvious that a good portion of the men in our society DON'T view women like this. I know I don't, so yea, bad analogy is bad. Women have no agency, are forced into sex and gain nothing from the exchang…
/r/MensRights27/09/12 05:11 PM
1

Yup. Fucking hell.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 04:46 PM
3

This. People would rather be brought down a peg themselves to bring you down to their level, than to get a level ahead but watch you get two. It's human nature.
/r/MensRights27/09/12 04:41 PM
0

This. We need to do it. Now!
/r/MensRights26/09/12 01:48 PM
1

Agreed.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 01:43 PM
-4

You know who ELSE posts addresses/locations of people? Anti-abortionists (the kind that either want to bomb clinics or help/endorse those who do). Yup: these bastions of anti-oppression use the very same tactics the oppressors used as well.
/r/MensRights26/09/12 01:33 PM
1

She was brought up on a steady diet of garbage. She was told that she could be a mother who was not just slim, fit, healthy and beautiful, but she could have a stellar career with all the money and prestige attending it. A job lot, sold by a society which isn't allowed to sell the truth any more. And this is something i've been thinking about as of late. Things have gotten to this point because of society's propensity to give to women (protect their physical and emotional state of comfort), whil…
/r/MensRights26/09/12 01:25 AM
7

/thread
/r/MensRights25/09/12 06:45 PM
1

Yup. Almost did this myself and I felt like shit doing it, even though, conversely, I've been dumped myself for far less important reasons. It's just one of those things, ya know? You're always going to be the badguy unless the OTHER person fucks up. This is generally a relationship thing, but I think women do this more-so to safeguard their view of themselves.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 04:51 PM
0

Because they win majority of custody, but anyways yea, this is just evidence of the long-established fact that men and women are assholes at just about the same rates.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 03:19 PM
6

What? Guys are trying to be more egalitarian when it comes to dates? THIS IS OPPRESSIVE! Privilege at its best.
/r/MensRights25/09/12 08:07 AM
2

I got my shit together, lost all the weight and put effort into my appearance. I ended up dating this great guy who became my boyfriend and I learned what it was to actually have self esteem and not have to go online to seek validation as a "girl gamer" attention whore. Or, you know, work on your interpersonal issues like any mature person does? She says that she took effort to change things, but she doesn't say she did this because she's an active agent taking responsibility for her choices in …
/r/MensRights25/09/12 08:04 AM
0

I was overweight my whole life pretty much. I'd have plenty of crushes from guys growing up that always rejected me. I would even have guys come up to me and try to get me to check out situations with my girl friends so they could move in on them. I was a shy, awkward nerdy girl who took shit from everyone. Also: another example of a woman framing her experiences from the viewpoint of being an object without agency, where things just "happen" to her. She said she was overweight (partially a choi…
/r/MensRights25/09/12 07:54 AM
3

Yup. And you could spot them too. I know plenty of women gamers, but none of them ever blurted out their gender the moment they met a new user online somewhere. Nope, they did what every other male gamer does: play the damn game (and they were good, too). It was those clowns who promptly announced their gender, expect to be helped by white-knights, and who ultimately used the strategy for gain within the game via other people giving them shit, that never came across as "girl gamers" to me. They …
/r/MensRights25/09/12 07:43 AM
3

Hypoagency at its finest: "if we're not in control of men for us, they could do something or be used against us. Lets find out what they're up to!"
/r/MensRights25/09/12 07:40 AM
4

The problem is not hatred against men, but the hatred used against men to favor women. Men are seen as the least socially important components of society. I'd even argue that the only thing society considers socially important less than a man...is a corporation (hence why you find a lot of the subjects regarding men's issues contained under the same umbrella of labour: it's men versus 'capitalism').
/r/MensRights25/09/12 07:38 AM
1

Do you have anything constructive to add?
/r/MensRights25/09/12 06:23 AM
2

Step 1) Ignore actual argument (and its substance) in favor of posting an inflammatory, insulting response. Step 2) Claim that your opponents are "hatred-filled bigots" Step 3) Miss the part where your attempts to bait your opponents serves as evidence against the narrative you have of them. Step 4) ???? Step 5) PROFIT!
/r/MensRights24/09/12 11:58 PM
2

What if it's used by a woman on a man who's NOT trying to rape her? What about if she's trying to rape HIM?
/r/MensRights24/09/12 10:50 PM
1

What happens when women, like men, can be parents without bearing children? I don't know, equality, you fucking assholes? Yea, shit like this pisses me off: they WANT to keep it because they know it gives them an advantage. They fucking state it out in the plane. But when you point out that it gives an advantage, in say, paternity disputes, people try to rationalize it away. This is power in its most naked form. Well, okay, probably not "most naked form"...I said to be dramatic, but you get my p…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 10:43 PM
1

No worries man. Hang in there.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:49 PM
3

Ahh, I see. Now I understand your view on the MRM and what activism means to you. It's not about attacking others, it's about "Being that change you want to see in the world". Fair enough. I think it's a commendable way to go about it. Cheers.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:48 PM
1

How much have you tried to make them work, though? Yes, there are shitty psychiatrists, but a good one isn't supposed to do something FOR you. They're meant to help you figure out what's going on inside your own head (and heart). Don't give up, man, keep trying to figure yourself out. Maybe turn to your religion for help, anything. Just get a handle on it.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:30 PM
4

Haha, no worries. If you find it, you find it. If you don't, you don't. It's all good.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:23 PM
3

Maybe you're depressed (i hear this a lot). Might be worth it to try counseling/therapy to check it out.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:19 PM
10

It's okay bro. Go do something to make yourself feel better, n come back.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:13 PM
1

Wow, thanks for that. Yea, I've experienced something akin to this myself: by soul-searching for answers on life/the world, I was able to find myself and who I am (and more to the point: i was able to shape and define my manhood based on the answers I got out of this search).
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:12 PM
4

Lack of male-oriented rituals in society that help to shape the character/personality of men. At least that's my answer, since I've experienced the same thing too.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:11 PM
7

There's an eerie bit of terror contained in these types of jokes: these people are genuinely frightened by the fact of being single, as if all of society itself was saying to them that their existence didn't matter. It's a subtle form of desperation that informs the kinds of people who can't leave relationships. Alas, I say this from personal experience on the matter.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:09 PM
5

Please do this. I'd love to see something like this!
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:07 PM
13

With men, we tend to be hard on each other because the criticism and honesty is valuable and is more productive with us. I've heard of studies regarding in-group preference among men, but I haven't heard of any regarding the propensity to engage with criticism and the growth/maturity of men in general. I'd love to see some evidence/data backing this up (or exploring this topic in general). They knew she fucked up and they knew she did a terrible thing but they treated her nicely and helped her f…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:06 PM
4

And why do you somehow think that social norms don't influence legal ones? Or that social circumstances set things up to lead to unequal incomes in the law? For example: divorce. Stay at home moms are awarded alimony, but the social construction of gender means that women desire to stay home with their kids (and get to) more often than men do, which THEN leads to the conclusion of alimony. It is only by attacking social values, interrogating and critiquing them, that we can come to change the wa…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:59 PM
1

Amazing. Sorry that happened to you.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:57 PM
2

I think people are people and that these rules and roles we make up... a lot of them are bullshit. Everybody has the capacity of emotion and we need to fight that urge to just stick to tradition where only women are allowed to feel. Women can also put aside their feelings at times, something men are taught to do at an early age. Exactly. Anyone can fill in a role (sole breadwinner, stay at home parent, etc), but genders assigned to roles ignores the annoying little thing call facts and reality.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:56 PM
1

Yup, your last part nailed it, and it takes a mature person to be able to make those kinds of calls. And i'm all for maturity.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:54 PM
2

Yup.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:51 PM
3

Yea, that's one of the most fucked up things about divorce: you're literally punished for being an amazing partner and providing for the person you love. Nope, it's like society is saying "fuck those that don't work, if you marry one, you're screwed, so don't!". Yes, I know that the laws are actually designed to reward these types of people, but the moment people start figuring out what's up, the trend's going to change.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:50 PM
11

Yup. Almost every love song about a man dating a woman who's "in a relationship with a guy who neglects her", is about this too. Like that LL-Cool-J song (i forgot how to write his name) that basically attacks a guy for not giving his wife enough emotional attention (assuming he was too busy working to provide for her in the place). The song basically castigates a guy for not knowing that women need "love" too, not just "money", but ignores the fact that no woman would be satisfied with just "lo…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:48 PM
2

Also it is full of straight up lies: once there was a post about erotic scene in a movie. suddenly everyone in that thread turned out to be an actor and explain how it is "natural" to be nude and actually have sex in front of a camera and how it is "unfair" for the SO of an actress to be there. THEN a real movie director visited that thread, explained how in reality there is rarely any nudity in film even if it looks like it. And how in his experience everything is done in closed-set, with only …
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:41 PM
0

In other words: the female narrative that radfems/white-knights frame of women themselves helps to reinforce a social trend away from politics. I guess the flip-side of that coin would be, say, traditionalists that would attack a woman in a leadership position in politics, not taking her seriously when she proposes policy changes, or attacking her arguments not for their merit (or lack thereof) but simply because of how she appears (dresses, acts, etc, finding fault with everything).
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:38 PM
10

100k+ IS STILL A GOOD INCOME TO HAVE. Don't deceive yourself on that point. I didn't realize what a shell of my former self I'd become until I started separating and living alone. And this is one of the true horrors of hypo-agency: when someone else's life (and possible future) is sacrificed (albeit slowly) for someone else's standard of living to be improved, it's fucked up.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:34 PM
9

Not sure if you actually read the thread(s) because you would have easily realized that it's a lot more complicated than simply "because you're a guy". The evidence is not a single incident, or the existence of unequal but equitable partnerships, but about the existence of a growing disproportion of relationship advice that vilifies the man, even when he's a victim, and victimizes the woman, even when she's the villain (or simply not a "victim"). It's this that the phrase "because you're a guy" …
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:30 PM
1

True. I've known about relatiuonship_advice but never frequented it myself.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 07:28 PM
1

Good point. It's not black and white, but rather varying degrees of grey. We can only do so much, but that much is still important.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 04:11 PM
1

Unbelievable.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:51 PM
1

You were absolutely correct in using it. I'm actually kind of proud that such a test exists: "insert race/sexual-orientation, etc" and if it's bad then, then it's bad now. It makes all the work the brave folks did during the civil rights era, and even before that (and now, for that matter) all the more important and far-reaching. Hopefully society starts "getting" it and realize that NO bigotry is okay, even misandry.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:49 PM
1

Too be fair, I assumed it was one of those "guy gets hit in the balls" kind of vids, not this, so I jumped the gun there. No, i don't think pranks like these ought to be criminal (so long as they're just pranks, not malicious or anything, etc etc). But you have to admit that the whole "man getting hit in the balls" trope is extremely discriminatory: violence (sexual violence, at that) and it's seen as a joke. It's from this that my reply as aimed at. But yes, you're right. This isn't particularl…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:43 PM
2

That's a very Hobbesian view. No, not in the "life is nasty, brutish, and short" way, but in the "people are equal" kind of way. Where one person is advantaged, another person develops an advantage to counteract that other person's advantage. The strong but view are contrasted by the weak but many. Etc. things like that. Nature has a way of balancing things.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:38 PM
4

Even in situations where women outnumber the men. Interesting.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:31 PM
8

Good catch.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 03:30 PM
1

Now, i wish he'd just take the logical step and say "This is oppressive towards men", and then start exploring why this happens and what it means. But I guess that's asking for too much. =\
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:54 PM
1

Breaks my heart. Fucking aye. Since when have we started jailing people for debt?
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:50 PM
7

Another area to see real misogyny is in politics: women have a hard time being taken seriously even though they're elected based on their competency and electability (the people thought they were qualified). They're ridiculed, made light of, mocked for their choices in clothing, etc, and it all comes down to these social gender norms: men are seen as the legitimate holders of "authority" because they're the "main-actors" (especially in violence), while women are seen as passive objects, to be ac…
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:43 PM
-1

Yup. It's our shitty brains, tbh. However much we've involved in terms of the software of our brains, our hardware is still comparatively primitive.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:40 PM
2

Basically: it was Robert Cox that said that all ideologies (theories) are created from some foundation (viewpoint/assumptions/conclusion) for some purpose. In politics, this is especially the case.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:36 PM
2

I see your point and agree that that sentiment's there. At the same time, however, women get pretty fucked under sharia law, so while the two don't cancel each other out, it's not one-sided man-hating. it's man-hating induced by woman-hating.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:35 PM
9

I know, but humor me. I'm hoping this conversation turns into some form of self-referendum on the state of subreddits that are, essentially, supposed to be useful for all genders/sexual-orientations/whatever. I've seen a number of posts by gay people on there and they were met with a very pleasant reception (actual useful advice, not crap like this), so I'm hella curious as to what's going on in these people heads.
/r/MensRights24/09/12 01:33 PM
4

Wow, since when has it been that in Ontario, you could get charged with a sexual assault for a hickey given with consent?? WTF?!
/r/MensRights23/09/12 10:56 PM
3

Legal discrimination? (what's a crime against a woman isn't against a man)
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:45 PM
1

Biological determinism need not shame the course of events of how people treat each other. physical inequality does not need translate into inequality in person-hood, which is the central premise of liberalism.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:43 PM
1

Would you boycott a company trying to depict black people as monkeys? If so, then yes this is the same thing. And this is coming from a black male. Sexism sucks shit.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:42 PM
1

Ironic??? Omg, the "stupid", it hurts! Nothing ironic about INTENTIONALLY DRESSING UP A CERTAIN WAY AND GETTING A RESPONSE TO IT. You chose to dress that way (as a political statement), so why are you surprised that your provocation was met with a provoked response? Insane. You can just SEE the attempts to render invisible any and all female agency. Nuts. And the second one? Seriously, what kind of person wants their partner to become completely subservient to them? You're proud that your boyfri…
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:38 PM
1

Because Communism (with the big C) became totalitarian. As for communism with a small C, well..
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:31 PM
1

Yup.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:30 PM
3

Know who else have had a lot of power in history? The aristocrats! the Rich! Guess every rich/aristocratic person contained the SAME characteristics biologically speaking..right? Oh wait...no, that makes no fucking sense. SO yea, having SOME men at the top doesn't mean the gender ITSELF is at top. Nice fallacy there.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:30 PM
1

Good point.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:26 PM
6

Agreed, it's hard work. But the idea isn't that it's not work, but that it's only assigned to one gender. Work in the workforce is seen while work at home is invisible. It's the same gender narrative/divide bullshit that's been peddled for countless years. The second problem is this: not all home situations are equal. Yes, raising kids is difficult work, but not all kids take the same amount of efforts. Not every home takes the same amount of work. There's no unit of standardization involved. Th…
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:25 PM
1

Good point. It's a fucking vicious cycle.
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:18 PM
3

This post (and those like it) are the reason why I subscribe to this subreddit and identify with MRA issues. Bravo; well written!
/r/MensRights23/09/12 08:17 PM
1

Yes, please. I'm dying to know if this is true or not.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:52 PM
7

And why do they want this? Because women are apparently such delicate, dainty glass snowflakes of emotional fragility that they cannot and should not ever be expected to voice their objection to sexual activity in any way at any time during what is obviously a sexual interlude. Bullshit. Exactly. It's like some kind of victorian-era type of shit. "Oh, women are incapable of being equal partners in sexual enjoyment: they have no preferences, proclivities, etc. Cuz, ya know, it's not like they'd s…
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:51 PM
3

Was in agreement with the thesis up until the part where they said it doesn't matter if she communicates the changed consent status....Yea, what?? Are people supposed to suddenly become psychic now, if they want to have sex? "I'm getting something...I'm getting something....seems like you want me to STOP". Like it's a game of charades.....wth.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:48 PM
3

Well sure, when we start seeing pics of droves of them coming outta coal-mines, or or being bomb defusers, then yea! We'll be making progress.... OR Society will jump to say that the risks that are NORMAL for those jobs suddenly need to be addressed and looked it (and possibly altering the rate of pay for said jobs. Yea, i think that's what will really happen.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 09:46 PM
1

Yup.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 08:26 AM
5

The problem is not that the child has a serious impact on your career or could make you be out of work for a while. While it's disadvantageous for you in the immediate sense, it is offset by the benefit you get from raising your own offspring. People have children for a reason: it's the closest thing to biological immortality we can get - you pass on a piece of "yourself". Having kids is a selfish thing. Sure, before society was as advanced as it was today, having kids was a duty, in order to ke…
/r/MensRights21/09/12 08:24 AM
4

I had the youngest last year, I paid support the entire time despite having the kid living with me. Its not best interest of the kid. Wow. Just....wow. And yet, when you point this out in society, you're "Attacking women!" Unbelievable. Even when you try to make an argument for the well-being of the children, society puts women's interests, feelings, and needs above even that. "Child support going to everything BUT the child? We don't give a fuck. Taking child support from the one parent to pay …
/r/MensRights21/09/12 08:13 AM
4

So basically: a denial of reality. Like taking credit for killing someone while claiming not to have "done" it when you did. "Yea, I'm a badass! But I didn't get my hands dirty." Nutty.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 07:08 AM
1

Because it's not those with the best argument but those that speak loudest to the public that represent the "ownership and face" of a movement. This is why the MRM self-polices: it's not doing it in a way that tries to expose a bad argument,; it's doing it in a way that silences loud (but crazy) voices from being heard so that the perceived identity of the MRM can be shown in a respectable way. (ie: classy)
/r/MensRights21/09/12 05:59 AM
0

No worries, bro. :)
/r/MensRights21/09/12 05:56 AM
0

Well, my point was that they should sort of aim their efforts....to being outside the first world (save for shit like what Todd Atkin said, because that was offensive to anyone with a decent amount of sensibility in them). To helping causes that alleviate the suffering in areas that don't have a livable 'standard of living'. People without electricity, proper sanitation conditions, whatever. Focus THERE. Those people need them and they ought to direct their efforts towards them.
/r/MensRights21/09/12 05:50 AM
-11

But it saves lives. Sorry if I prioritize gains in the real world over attacking what could very well be a misguided goose-hunt, or at worse, an ideological dead-end-turned-dogmatism. And as a black man who's background is from a "third world country", let me tell you this: i've been around enough women who agree with this point. Women in the first world, compared to those in the third world, are PRIVILEGED. Check your classism at the door, please. Hell, go read ANY writings on black feminism (t…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:34 PM
2

So the claim that feminists objectify women IS true. TO say you are a perpetual victim, because your very nature is different than a mans, is to open to door to bigotry of the harshest kind. You would think that feminists, hoping to fight oppression, would have learned this very lesson by now. But they haven't...same is true with black folks in North America: blacks that are homophobic don't see how ironic their stance, considering the history of civil rights issues, racism, and slavery that aff…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 07:28 PM
0

Everything happening outside of the first world. Shit's rough out there, man. Us living in the first world live in a fantasy world.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:49 PM
48

“One thing I talk about [in the book] is that I used to think as a woman it’s hard to be a men’s rights activist,” she says. “I want men and women who care about them to have the courage to stand up in a world that says that there is only male privilege. I would like people to put themselves in somebody else’s shoes and see the world from the male point of view and see that maybe things aren’t so great.” If feminists had remained this way, that is: had they stayed true towards their goal of equa…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:48 PM
2

Yup.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:07 PM
5

We need to ALL hold each other to a standard of accountability, viewing each and every one of us as active, moral agents in this world of ours. That's the fix.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:02 PM
2

never realized that about this passage. I always used to think of it as "patriarchy..men trying to hold it down" but put reversely, it's seen that he's pointing out the tendency for women and society to pain themselves as objects, so as to accrue sympathy and/or dodge blame since they lack agency in the affairs that happen around them.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 05:01 PM
6

Yup. If a guy focused on what he needs to do in order to bring home the bacon, society chastises him for "not paying attention to wife's emotional needs..." Even though he's providing for all other needs. He's a bad guy because he didn't do "enough". On the flip-side, a woman who gets cheated on by her husband is regarded as a victim and is protected. Shrug Just can't win.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:59 PM
2

Because men get blamed for it since they "didn't leave" or "weren't wise enough" or "need to toughen up AND leave her", etc. She's written off as an abhorrent individual ("NAWALT) and then if the guy doesn't like this advice, he's a jerk. He also can't respond to the act of being cheated on in any way outside the approved and expected range of responses society thinks men ought to display (re: emasculated; not allowed to feel intense emotions, or else they're labeled unauthentic or over-the-top.…
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:56 PM
2

Fighting against this very thing myself.
/r/MensRights20/09/12 04:49 PM
10

Why engage in a meaningful debate similar to, say, creationism versus evolution? Why not just slander, ridicule, mud-sling, and tell lies/manipulate the ignorant into hating the MRM! Yup, sounds like something the "good guys" would do!
/r/MensRights20/09/12 11:45 AM
2

Man-shaming? Where?
/r/MensRights19/09/12 06:24 PM
9

It's not about fighting for the oppressed, it's about fighting to BECOME the oppressors. This is getting out of hand.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 06:20 PM
1

I'd tell you that you forgot to add /s but unfortunately society regards this as largely true.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 12:30 PM
2

Egalitarian, yes. But alas, this isn't the case at all. It's like a real-life fucking "Animal Farm": Everyone is equal, but SOME are more equal than others. Fuck!
/r/MensRights19/09/12 12:29 PM
1

I'm of two minds here. Ideally, I'd hope ANYONE would jump in to help someone who's in need of help, be they man, woman, or child. That said, to expect it, not as "help", but as a privilege ("I'm going to be helped because that's what society does for women") kind of thing, it makes me hope they don't get helped at all. Altruism (at least at the individual level) is something that has to be made by a choice. If it's forced, then it's not altruistic and it's not "good". It's extraction.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 12:26 PM
2

I’m an honorably separated, decorated combat veteran and receive VA disability. Here in California, that disability counts toward my ability to pay her alimony. I met her AFTER I became a civilian… She gets paid more thanks to my service. This part made me tremble with sadness..like, WTF! Fighting for one's country is a joke in this day and age. We don't do justice to teh freedoms that we have that were hard-fought and won. We deserve to be brought back to a monarchy.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 01:53 AM
0

Top one: "I can't force BF to perform sexual act on me (attempted-sexual assault??), what do I do?" Answer: "Threaten him with his disposability, shower and make yourself feel all nice, and if he doesn't comply, challenge his man-hood!" Bottom one: "I can't force my GF to go down on me. What do I do?" Answer: "Aww, you disgusting pig! Why are you objectifying her (pr0n reference??) and trying to coerce her into doing something she doesn't want??!" Yea, incredible shit.
/r/MensRights19/09/12 01:06 AM
1

There's no law requiring the consent of a person to cheat on their spouse, which could "affect her and the rest of the family", is there? Face it, this is more gendered bullshit to get men in trouble when they exercise their freedom over their bodies, while women are getting less and less restricted by the choices they make, even when said ease comes at the expense of somebody else. Sorry for the re-post but you don't seem to much want to read what's actually being said here, do you? If you need…
/r/MensRights19/09/12 12:57 AM
3

You forgot your /s.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:13 PM
2

Apply this test: does the circumstances absolve person A) of respnosibility? Was person B) implicated in those exact same circumstances? Then it follows that person B is absolved of all responsibility. Example: two people have drunk sex, but it is society that says that if opposing genders are involved, the man is responsible for the occurance and the woman isn't. This is sheer lunacy: if alcohol prevents the woman from giving consent, then so does it for the man...unless they're trying to argue…
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:11 PM
0

Exactly. This guy would have you think that men don't experience emotions. The whole idea that women = emotions, men = logic is an incredibly sexist, oppressive discourse that people of a more traditionalist-lean use to try and justify concrete gender roles that evolved due as a necessity to a harsh life. That world no longer exists but they still want to imprison people in the confines of its limit. It's insane.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:08 PM
6

go away, troll. You're a disgrace.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 08:05 PM
8

What clowns.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 01:05 PM
17

Nailed it. Simple yet elegant.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 01:01 PM
1

Because on the internet, no one hears you say "yea, I agree!"
/r/MensRights17/09/12 12:47 PM
2

I read that as "if the idea of MtF was to have sex with lesbians, then people would be up in arms, but since it just affects men, no one cares." I don't see how what you wrote was the intended meaning of what they said.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 12:46 PM
5

How so? How is someone not wanting to sleep with someone who is transgendered any different than someone not wanting to sleep with any other potential sexual partner, based on whatever criteria they choose? This is taking away a person's right to choose who they sleep with because of someone elses right to alter their genders. it makes no sense.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 03:18 AM
3

But one thing people miss is that your wife knows (to some extent at least) that if the relationship breaks down she will be fine. This. Times a thousand.
/r/MensRights17/09/12 03:14 AM
6

No-True Scotsman fallacy revealed for the hypocrisy it really is. "oh, those are just extremists...NAFALT, but MRAs? yea, fuck em! They're all extremists and/or responsible for the activities of extremists!!!" Literally insane. Edit: Not insane because they're hypocritical, since everyone is at some point, but insane in their utter lack of ability to acknowledge not just that they do it, but that they are even CAPABLE of it. To them, the idea of being a hypocrite does not exist..at least not in …
/r/MensRights16/09/12 06:14 AM
3

Yup. Nailed it. "So, these bigoted MRA people are bigoted because they're picking on a guy missing the point that they are attacked a lot, so I'm gonna attack em some more while I also acknowledge associates of mine that have attacked them, too! That'll show those bigots!"
/r/MensRights16/09/12 06:12 AM
1

Lack of same-group preference plus social norms? Men are the natural absorbers of abject violence in our society.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 02:16 AM
1

Hmm, good point, but at the same time what's to stop the SAHP from abusing it? I think it's a double-edge sword that can only be applicable in an extremely measured situation.
/r/MensRights16/09/12 02:10 AM
6

So basically because she has more money and flexibility, she has to do more. Welcome to the good life, feminists! youve come a long way, baby
/r/MensRights15/09/12 03:42 PM
2

Harsher sentences to victims of unidirectional violence. But..thats like sayingpeople who engage in the same crime as their partners...wiill get punished as well`.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 02:36 PM
4

Source? I wouldnt' advocate for that from either sides of the gender divide...that's just fucked up. Being cheated on entitles you to defend yourself, but not to intentionally fuck that person over (revenge).
/r/MensRights15/09/12 02:18 PM
2

You know as well as I do that she will have to account for every penny during the divorce proceedings. Didn't know this. Glad it exists; makes me a little less angry. People STILL shouldn't be able to do it, however. It's practically theft if the money (or a portion of it) wasn't earned by the person who took it, though. AT least when its taken unilaterally like this to harm said person it was taken from (being gender neutral because it's really a human position to take against stealing in gener…
/r/MensRights15/09/12 02:16 PM
6

See, the fucked up thing about these issues is that they make any DECENT human being turn into an ugly one, slowly, over time. Issues of bigotry usually do that to those experiencing the harm of said bigotry, whatever direction it goes. Personally speaking, I'll never forgive the people who endorse this sorry state of affairs because they've made it much more difficult for me to continue staying a decent human being without becoming jaded too. Sorry you had to go through that man; sorry that soc…
/r/MensRights15/09/12 02:13 PM
4

Not only could the boyfriend have killed him with one blow, the girlfriend could have killed him too. If the logic was merely that the strong should protect the weak, a young and fit woman would intervene when an old and unfit man was being attacked. Same logic applies to giving up one's seat on the bus: if you see someone who has trouble standing or they're a child, then yea you'd feel inclined to give up your seat...but when it's an able-bodied woman who can stand just as perfectly as you can,…
/r/MensRights15/09/12 05:23 AM
20

Apparently, only women need to be taught how to defend themselves FTFY Why aren't these sort of classes...mandatory for everyone? Always wondered about that one.
/r/MensRights15/09/12 05:15 AM
3

I've always said that children are best served with BOTH parents having active roles in their lives, irrespective of who has official custody. Hence why I don't think you should move either, and neither should anyone else. At least not too far out of a general zone that makes both parents being there for the kid a possibility.
/r/MensRights14/09/12 09:57 PM
11

Did I just read right? The courts ordered the husband to reveal his location even when they had EVIDENCE that the wife was trying to send the husband's location to a random ex-con.....did I really just read that right?? What are these guys thinking? It's like giving a loaded gun to someone trying to murder somebody.....oh wait!
/r/MensRights14/09/12 01:23 PM
7

Did she just do the "Reverse the genders and shit would fly" argument? REALLY, Judge Judy? Hah! I've always been a fan but this just sealed the fucking deal. And I like how at the end of the video in the last link, where they both get to say their peace, the let the chick get 2-3 sentences in (she was talking kind of fast) but couldn't let the guy get in more than two words at a time, making what he had to say almost entirely unintelligible...even JUST following a judge being "fair and balanced"…
/r/MensRights14/09/12 05:25 AM
2

Good point. Source, please?
/r/MensRights13/09/12 07:41 PM
1

Gut-wrenching.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:14 PM
4

Cause, ya know, FUCK the children, right? AMIRITE?! Unbelievable. When even children aren't safe from this shit, that's how you know we've gone into the deep end.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:10 PM
7

when you suck away all the join and gain of getting married (see: benefit), it's a wonder why anyone does it at all.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:06 PM
6

This. Politics (and thus power) follows the movement of money and directed action.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 08:57 PM
2

Banned subreddit?
/r/MensRights12/09/12 07:30 PM
7

Now change "man-hating" to "racism" and "she's not an extremist" to "she's not really racist in general, but some of her views are indeed racist", and then you'll see why this post is silly. You're not asking for better explanations of extremely fair and reasonable arguments; you're asking for ammunition to combat the taint of hateful stereotypes and social constructs, which sounds like the same kind of job someone fighting racism would do.... Just my two cents there. Good luck!
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:11 PM
1

There are lessons to be learned in comparisons, to say the least of understanding how they all interact with each other as well as by themselves.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:03 PM
1

I've made efforts to move the demographic from women/elderly/kids to everyone (basically men too) and moved it from "because she's a woman/they're physically weak" to "because I like helping people" and "being polite is always the way to go". No sense in not being courteous, even if it was used in the past as a form of benevolent sexism.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:03 PM
2

If women started joining and dying in horrible, horrific crashes..I don't think there'd be much left of such a sport.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 03:57 PM
2

This is a simple one: because the consequences of abortions affect men, either by way of having or not having children. (Keyword: children)
/r/MensRights12/09/12 03:53 PM
3

Yup. I`ve heard it before that white women have it worse than black men....even when pointing out things like the war on drugs or inner-city crime, etc etc.....makes me want to headdesk myself into oblivion.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:11 AM
1

Cross-burning...shudders
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:10 AM
4

This. Times ten. Half the folks in the radfem recesses of feminism don`t even experience anything close to what people in the third world experience....on a regular basis. SMH
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:09 AM
1

Forgot the /s
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:04 AM
2

So next on their list should be outlawing holding doors open for women.......Yea no, not really buying the part about it being bad.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 05:01 AM
1

Fucking this. Gonna do it right now.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:53 AM
3

Yea, the part about taking away sexual pleasure...just indicated that it's a fake.
/r/MensRights12/09/12 04:32 AM
3

Why do we think it's okay for anyone to give up their hard-earned money simply for marrying another human being? Yes, I know it makes sense to have some sort of alimony in the event of one parent staying at home to raise the children (thus harming their ability to be hired in the future due to a gap in employment) and YES I agree that assets acquired as a COUPLE (ie invested into with shared money, etc) ought to be split equitably...but my god, just marrying someone entitles you to half the shit…
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:40 PM
189

Black male here and I'm totally a white supremacist! Reminds me of the lies spread by creationists about evolution...or Scientology. These people are delusional. Evidence of a shitty argument: shouting, lies, bullying tactics, etc...pretty much everything BUT open and honest discussion about the facts. This is a red flag for ANY movement of any kind.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:36 PM
2

Yea, history seems to be a thing that's very biased. That said, many people are fucked up back in those days.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:35 PM
1

Probably. Personally, I think the whole "gloating" thing smacks of immaturity. Lots of smart individuals in this world of all shapes, sizes, colors, genders, whatever. What's more important than being smart is what we're doing about it.
/r/MensRights11/09/12 04:34 PM
1

The system working as it's supposed to....shocked.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:35 PM
2

How is seeing your children ever an "abusive" thing? I thought it was a fucking right....this is so insane.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:33 PM
2

"IF" being the key word. The point is to investigate and research and put forth facts, and at the same time, evidence of one thing doesn't prove mutual exclusivity (it could be both, at the same time.., etc).
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:32 PM
3

This person went from "too" to "more" in order to indicate a false controversy, act like a "moderate middle person" and "shut down the drama", all in order to silence expression and render abuse against men invisible. SUCH CHARACTER AND CHARM!
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:30 PM
7

Because WOMEN! I mean, Patriarchy! Yup, when you have a word that's used to describe (and justify) everything, it loses all meaning.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:27 PM
6

Pretty much sums it up.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 03:23 PM
2

Don't know what school you went to, but both Columbus' evils AND the constant wars the natives waged (particularly, the Mayan) were both taught....I think you need to get out more, bro.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 02:53 PM
21

Because it suits their particular agenda.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 02:51 PM
4

Basically.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 02:50 PM
7

Thus we see an ideology move from "anti-oppression" to "oppressive" the moment it seems convenient to.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 02:41 PM
1

This is white privilege Black male here; that's not privilege (at least not in your example), but relative advantage. Relative in the sense that it's not some objective, absolute good that you possess, but rather a good you posses in relation to another human being, and 'advantage' only in the sense that your experience is how the norm 'ought' to be. In other words: it's not privilege if you're experience less shittiness that people ought not to be experiencing in the first place. A proper examp…
/r/MensRights10/09/12 01:21 PM
2

This is the thing about oppression: it doesn't give a flying fuck WHO is doing the oppressing. This is why ideologies that aim for anti-oppression and egalitarianism far outweigh ideologies that say "oppression for some", be it racism, or feminism. And this, I think, will be the main dividing point in the conflicts to come.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 01:15 PM
2

Welcome to being a man: no one cares.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 01:12 PM
2

She basically made the argument that if you aren't drinking the woman kool-aid (that desire we all have to help women, that biological instinct), then no woman would choose you as a mate, therefore you're just a loser that's irrelevant.
/r/MensRights10/09/12 12:43 PM
32

It's shit like this, Mensright...Oh wait, this had a happy ending. :D Good job on that one, OP!
/r/MensRights08/09/12 07:00 PM
1

yup.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 06:11 PM
1

Maybe he ignored her for a whole day~!
/r/MensRights08/09/12 03:05 PM
13

I get told to kill myself every day...when I play League of Legends....
/r/MensRights08/09/12 02:47 PM
2

Pro-tip: Don't be such a pompous ASS, consider alternative arguments, and generally try not to be an ass-hat and you won't have to "step down" (read: look like a damn fool and get laughed out the spotlight). /thread
/r/MensRights08/09/12 02:46 PM
3

Yea, honor killings are fucked up. Still chills my bones thinking about the fact that they happen....
/r/MensRights08/09/12 02:41 PM
2

nice troll
/r/MensRights08/09/12 02:38 PM
0

So basically you repeated yourself without making any new arguments or offering further clarification of your old ones.... Yea, you're a troll.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 02:59 AM
0

How is saying that "we need to appear harmless in order to be heard" an insult??? That's step one. Step two is pointing to evidence that suggests that this is a "good" thing. Step three? Dropping the ad hominems.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 02:45 AM
1

facepalm I don't even....what?! How could you get that from what i just said???
/r/MensRights08/09/12 01:57 AM
1

Interesting.
/r/MensRights08/09/12 01:18 AM
6

Men have been treating other men shitty for centuries..and they don't need much of a reason to do it. Religion, class, geographical origin, race, etc...There have even been studies done showing that while women have same-group preference, men have near none (or at least a lot less compared to women, and even have a 'woman preference' over fellow men).
/r/MensRights08/09/12 01:05 AM
2

Because men don't back-stab. It's not like "white knight" is a "thing". NOPE!
/r/MensRights08/09/12 12:58 AM
11

She was just stressed.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 11:39 PM
3

Right before the guy gets shamed into shutting up.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 11:38 PM
4

Yes, there is. It's not black and white, and while the latter is understandable, it's still wrong.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 11:38 PM
7

Morally, two wrong's don't make a right. It's not wrong to defend yourself, but destroying property when you're out of harms way is malicious. I wouldn't do it. I've never done it, and I've been abused before. shrug So yea, not morally justified either.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 09:49 PM
0

You usually when you make a claim...you sort of have to back it up with reasoned argument and evidence. But hey! Someone who insults someone who's agreeing with them probably isn't that mentally stable.
/r/MensRights07/09/12 09:48 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter